Financial - Capital Markets
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BGC vs MKTX vs TW vs ICE vs CME
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
BGC vs MKTX vs TW vs ICE vs CME — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges |
| Market Cap | $3.95B | $5.53B | $23.32B | $86.89B | $104.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.82B | $817M | $2.05B | $12.64B | $6.52B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $155M | $220M | $870M | $3.30B | $4.24B |
| Gross Margin | 100.0% | 68.9% | 67.3% | 61.9% | 86.1% |
| Operating Margin | 16.8% | 41.7% | 41.2% | 38.7% | 64.9% |
| Forward P/E | 7.6x | 18.2x | 27.1x | 19.1x | 23.6x |
| Total Debt | $1.78B | $73M | $278M | $20.28B | $3.76B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $852M | $544M | $2.08B | $837M | $4.42B |
BGC vs MKTX vs TW vs ICE vs CME — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BGC Group, Inc (BGC) | 100 | 422.1 | +322.1% |
| MarketAxess Holding… (MKTX) | 100 | 29.3 | -70.7% |
| Tradeweb Markets In… (TW) | 100 | 165.9 | +65.9% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 157.7 | +57.7% |
| CME Group Inc. (CME) | 100 | 157.9 | +57.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BGC vs MKTX vs TW vs ICE vs CME
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BGC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 27.6%, EPS growth 24.0%
- PEG 0.25 vs MKTX's 2.95
- 27.6% NII/revenue growth vs CME's 6.4%
- Lower P/E (7.6x vs 23.6x), PEG 0.25 vs 1.72
MKTX is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 1.4% vs TW's 0.8%
TW ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.09, Low D/E 3.9%, current ratio 4.94x
- Beta 0.09, yield 0.4%, current ratio 4.94x
- Beta 0.09 vs BGC's 0.78, lower leverage
ICE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.33, yield 1.3%
CME is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 291.2% 10Y total return vs ICE's 222.9%
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BGC's 0.8% (lower = leaner)
- 3.8% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BGC's 0.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 27.6% NII/revenue growth vs CME's 6.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.6x vs 23.6x), PEG 0.25 vs 1.72 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BGC's 0.8% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.09 vs BGC's 0.78, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +15.6% vs MKTX's -33.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BGC's 0.8% |
BGC vs MKTX vs TW vs ICE vs CME — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
BGC vs MKTX vs TW vs ICE vs CME — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BGC leads in 2 of 6 categories
CME leads 1 • MKTX leads 1 • TW leads 0 • ICE leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CME leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.6B annually — 15.5x MKTX's $817M. CME is the more profitable business, keeping 62.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BGC's 5.5%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.8B | $817M | $2.1B | $12.6B | $6.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $549M | $429M | $1.2B | $6.5B | $4.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $155M | $220M | $870M | $3.3B | $4.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $166M | $346M | $1.1B | $4.3B | $4.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +100.0% | +68.9% | +67.3% | +61.9% | +86.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +16.8% | +41.7% | +41.2% | +38.7% | +64.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.5% | +33.6% | +39.6% | +26.1% | +62.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +45.9% | +54.9% | +33.9% | +64.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -40.0% | -3.2% | +39.1% | +23.1% | +21.4% |
Valuation Metrics
BGC leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 20.4x trailing earnings, MKTX trades at a 42% valuation discount to BGC's 35.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TW offers better value at 0.86x vs MKTX's 3.32x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.0B | $5.5B | $23.3B | $86.9B | $104.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.9B | $5.1B | $21.5B | $106.3B | $103.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 35.13x | 20.45x | 28.95x | 26.59x | 25.84x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.64x | 18.16x | 27.09x | 19.14x | 23.61x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.16x | 3.32x | 0.86x | 2.99x | 1.88x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.29x | 12.00x | 19.64x | 16.47x | 23.08x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.40x | 6.77x | 11.36x | 6.88x | 16.04x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.57x | 4.04x | 3.27x | 3.02x | 3.62x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 14.73x | 20.69x | 20.26x | 24.95x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MKTX leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MKTX delivers a 15.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $12 for ICE. TW carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BGC's 1.55x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs CME's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.5% | +15.8% | +12.4% | +11.6% | +15.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.5% | +10.9% | +10.7% | +2.3% | +2.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +13.0% | +18.0% | +9.1% | +7.5% | +10.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.5% | +23.0% | +11.6% | +9.5% | +3.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.55x | 0.05x | 0.04x | 0.70x | 0.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $924M | -$472M | -$1.8B | $19.4B | -$666M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $852M | $544M | $2.1B | $837M | $4.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.8B | $73M | $278M | $20.3B | $3.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.24x | 443.10x | 636.14x | 6.53x | 41.55x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BGC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BGC five years ago would be worth $19,840 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,723 for MKTX. Over the past 12 months, BGC leads with a +15.6% total return vs MKTX's -33.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BGC at 38.8% vs MKTX's -19.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +22.0% | -16.2% | +3.2% | -3.8% | +9.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +15.6% | -33.6% | -23.3% | -11.3% | +5.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +167.2% | -47.3% | +52.9% | +48.2% | +72.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +98.4% | -62.8% | +35.5% | +42.4% | +64.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +125.2% | +37.2% | +212.8% | +222.9% | +291.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +38.8% | -19.2% | +15.2% | +14.0% | +19.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BGC and CME each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CME is the less volatile stock with a -0.30 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BGC's 0.78 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BGC currently trades 91.5% from its 52-week high vs MKTX's 63.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.78x | -0.28x | 0.09x | 0.33x | -0.30x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.90 | $232.84 | $149.25 | $189.35 | $329.16 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $8.27 | $148.47 | $97.06 | $143.17 | $257.17 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +91.5% | +63.9% | +73.3% | +81.0% | +87.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.0 | 28.9 | 37.6 | 42.0 | 41.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.4M | 443K | 1.3M | 3.1M | 2.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ICE and CME each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BGC as "Buy", MKTX as "Hold", TW as "Buy", ICE as "Buy", CME as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 31.4% upside for MKTX (target: $196) vs 5.6% for BGC (target: $12). For income investors, CME offers the higher dividend yield at 3.79% vs TW's 0.44%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $11.50 | $195.60 | $130.20 | $195.71 | $320.25 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 23 | 28 | 36 | 35 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.0% | +0.4% | +1.3% | +3.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 11 | 5 | 14 | 6 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.99 | $0.48 | $1.93 | $10.92 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.4% | +0.4% | +1.6% | +0.3% |
BGC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). CME leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
BGC vs MKTX vs TW vs ICE vs CME: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BGC or MKTX or TW or ICE or CME a better buy right now?
For growth investors, BGC Group, Inc (BGC) is the stronger pick with 27.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 6. 4% for CME Group Inc. (CME). MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX) offers the better valuation at 20. 4x trailing P/E (18. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate BGC Group, Inc (BGC) a "Buy" — based on 2 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — BGC or MKTX or TW or ICE or CME?
On trailing P/E, MarketAxess Holdings Inc.
(MKTX) is the cheapest at 20. 4x versus BGC Group, Inc at 35. 1x. On forward P/E, BGC Group, Inc is actually cheaper at 7. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: BGC Group, Inc wins at 0. 25x versus MarketAxess Holdings Inc. 's 2. 95x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BGC or MKTX or TW or ICE or CME?
Over the past 5 years, BGC Group, Inc (BGC) delivered a total return of +98.
4%, compared to -62. 8% for MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CME returned +291. 2% versus MKTX's +37. 2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — BGC or MKTX or TW or ICE or CME?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 30β versus BGC Group, Inc's 0. 78β — meaning BGC is approximately -355% more volatile than CME relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Tradeweb Markets Inc. (TW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 155% for BGC Group, Inc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BGC or MKTX or TW or ICE or CME?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), BGC Group, Inc (BGC) is pulling ahead at 27.
6% versus 6. 4% for CME Group Inc. (CME). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Tradeweb Markets Inc. grew EPS 61. 5% year-over-year, compared to 6. 3% for MarketAxess Holdings Inc.. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — BGC or MKTX or TW or ICE or CME?
CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the more profitable company, earning 62. 0% net margin versus 5. 5% for BGC Group, Inc — meaning it keeps 62. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CME leads at 64. 9% versus 16. 8% for BGC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BGC leads at 100. 0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is BGC or MKTX or TW or ICE or CME more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, BGC Group, Inc (BGC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 25x versus MarketAxess Holdings Inc. 's 2. 95x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, BGC Group, Inc (BGC) trades at 7. 6x forward P/E versus 27. 1x for Tradeweb Markets Inc. — 19. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MKTX: 31. 4% to $195. 60.
08Which pays a better dividend — BGC or MKTX or TW or ICE or CME?
In this comparison, CME (3.
8% yield), MKTX (2. 0% yield), ICE (1. 3% yield), TW (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. BGC does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BGC or MKTX or TW or ICE or CME better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 30), 3. 8% yield, +291. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CME: +291. 2%, BGC: +125. 2%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between BGC and MKTX and TW and ICE and CME?
Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: BGC is a small-cap high-growth stock; MKTX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TW is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CME is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. MKTX, ICE, CME pay a dividend while BGC, TW do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.