Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare Lazard Ltd (LAZ) vs The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) vs Morgan Stanley (MS) vs Evercore Inc. (EVR) vs Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | EVR | 22.7% revenue growth vs NMR's 13.4% |
| Value | NMR | Lower P/E (11.3x vs 16.7x), PEG 1.04 vs 2.94 |
| Quality / Margins | MS | 13.0% net margin vs NMR's 7.6% |
| Stability / Safety | NMR | Beta 1.19 vs EVR's 1.82 |
| Dividends | LAZ | 3.5% yield, vs GS's 1.6% |
| Momentum (1Y) | NMR | +45.9% vs LAZ's +4.9% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | EVR | 11.9% ROA vs NMR's 0.6%, ROIC 14.6% vs 1.0% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Valuation efficiency (growth/$)
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
Lazard is a global financial advisory and asset management firm that provides strategic advice on mergers, restructurings, and capital markets while managing investment portfolios for institutional and private clients. It generates revenue primarily through advisory fees from its Financial Advisory segment (roughly 60% of revenue) and management fees from its Asset Management business (roughly 40%). The company's key advantage lies in its century-old brand reputation, deep client relationships across governments and corporations worldwide, and its elite advisory teams that command premium fees for complex transactions.
Goldman Sachs is a global investment bank and financial services firm that provides investment banking, securities, and investment management services to corporations, governments, and high-net-worth individuals. It generates revenue primarily through investment banking fees (20-25%), trading and market-making in its Global Markets segment (40-45%), and asset management fees from its wealth and investment management divisions (30-35%). The firm's key competitive advantage lies in its elite brand reputation, deep client relationships with the world's largest corporations and governments, and its sophisticated risk management capabilities honed over decades.
Morgan Stanley is a global investment bank and wealth management firm that provides financial services to institutions, corporations, and individuals. It generates revenue primarily through investment banking fees (~30%), wealth management fees (~40%), and trading & sales activities (~25%), with the remainder from investment management. The company's competitive advantage lies in its elite brand reputation, global institutional relationships, and integrated platform that connects investment banking with wealth management.
Evercore is an independent investment banking advisory firm providing strategic advice on mergers, acquisitions, and capital markets transactions. It generates revenue primarily from investment banking advisory fees — roughly 85% of total revenue — with the remainder coming from investment management services for high-net-worth clients and institutions. The firm's key advantage is its reputation as a premium independent advisor, free from conflicts inherent in large universal banks, which attracts top-tier clients seeking unbiased strategic counsel.
Nomura Holdings is a Japanese financial services conglomerate that operates as a full-service investment bank and securities firm. It generates revenue primarily through its Wholesale segment — investment banking, trading, and securities underwriting — which contributes roughly 60-70% of total revenue, supplemented by Retail brokerage and Investment Management services. The company's key advantage is its dominant position in Japan's domestic capital markets and its extensive Asian franchise, which provides deep client relationships and local market expertise.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 5 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
EVR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). NMR leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
NMR is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.51T annually — 1504.0x EVR's $3.0B. MS is the more profitable business, keeping 13.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NMR's 7.6%.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | GSThe Goldman Sachs… | MSMorgan Stanley | EVREvercore Inc. | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.1B | $126.9B | $103.1B | $3.0B | $4.51T |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $384M | $23.4B | $26.3B | $697M | $533.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $273M | $16.7B | $16.2B | $528M | $370.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $468M | $15.8B | -$6.7B | $1.1B | $0 |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.1% | +41.1% | +55.6% | +99.4% | +36.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +12.5% | +14.5% | +17.1% | +17.8% | +10.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +9.1% | +11.3% | +13.0% | +12.6% | +7.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +22.6% | -12.1% | -2.0% | +32.0% | -19.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -34.3% | +45.8% | +48.9% | +83.9% | -5.5% |
Valuation Metrics
At 12.7x trailing earnings, NMR trades at a 63% valuation discount to EVR's 34.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NMR offers better value at 1.16x vs LAZ's 9.97x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | GSThe Goldman Sachs… | MSMorgan Stanley | EVREvercore Inc. | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.8B | $267.0B | $264.9B | $26.9B | $26.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.6B | $701.9B | $549.6B | $26.9B | $192.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 18.88x | 21.20x | 20.94x | 34.01x | 12.66x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.85x | 14.73x | 14.79x | 16.67x | 11.35x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 9.97x | 1.51x | 2.35x | 5.99x | 1.16x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.32x | 33.76x | 24.15x | 50.47x | 56.19x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.54x | 2.10x | 2.57x | 8.98x | 0.92x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.77x | 2.35x | 2.54x | 6.62x | 1.20x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.81x | — | — | 28.09x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
LAZ delivers a 28.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $29 in annual profit, vs $10 for NMR. EVR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.48x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NMR's 8.75x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LAZ scores 8/9 vs GS's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | GSThe Goldman Sachs… | MSMorgan Stanley | EVREvercore Inc. | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +28.6% | +12.6% | +14.6% | +25.3% | +10.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.9% | +0.9% | +1.2% | +11.9% | +0.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.2% | +1.9% | +2.9% | +14.6% | +1.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.3% | +3.6% | +3.8% | +13.9% | +2.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.87x | 5.06x | 3.42x | 0.48x | 8.75x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $884M | $434.8B | $284.7B | -$16M | $25.83T |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.3B | $182.1B | $75.7B | $940M | $5.51T |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.2B | $616.9B | $360.5B | $923M | $31.35T |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.01x | 0.31x | 0.44x | 35.22x | 0.20x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $27,615 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,919 for LAZ. Over the past 12 months, NMR leads with a +45.9% total return vs LAZ's +4.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 36.6% vs LAZ's 14.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | GSThe Goldman Sachs… | MSMorgan Stanley | EVREvercore Inc. | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.7% | -6.0% | -7.9% | -11.8% | +6.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +4.9% | +40.4% | +28.0% | +29.4% | +45.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +51.5% | +154.7% | +83.8% | +142.8% | +137.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +49.2% | +176.1% | +131.0% | +159.4% | +69.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +103.8% | +521.2% | +662.8% | +614.6% | +160.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.9% | +36.6% | +22.5% | +34.4% | +33.4% |
Risk & Volatility
NMR is the less volatile stock with a 1.19 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than EVR's 1.82 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NMR currently trades 93.9% from its 52-week high vs EVR's 79.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | GSThe Goldman Sachs… | MSMorgan Stanley | EVREvercore Inc. | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.72x | 1.36x | 1.35x | 1.82x | 1.19x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $58.75 | $984.70 | $192.68 | $388.71 | $9.58 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $31.97 | $439.38 | $94.33 | $148.63 | $4.86 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +86.1% | +87.3% | +86.4% | +79.5% | +93.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.7 | 52.2 | 51.2 | 44.3 | 53.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 807K | 2.0M | 5.8M | 355K | 1.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LAZ as "Buy", GS as "Hold", MS as "Buy", EVR as "Buy", NMR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 29.1% upside for EVR (target: $399) vs -35.7% for NMR (target: $6). For income investors, LAZ offers the higher dividend yield at 3.46% vs EVR's 1.06%.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | GSThe Goldman Sachs… | MSMorgan Stanley | EVREvercore Inc. | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $54.67 | $933.67 | $196.00 | $398.83 | $5.79 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 28 | 54 | 50 | 21 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.5% | +1.6% | +2.3% | +1.1% | +2.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 12 | 11 | 18 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.75 | $13.48 | $3.81 | $3.26 | $36.70 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.3% | +3.8% | +1.6% | +1.7% | +1.4% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Mar 20 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 100 | 146.04 | +46.0% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 465.19 | +365.2% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 416.89 | +316.9% |
| Evercore Inc. (EVR) | 100 | 777.47 | +677.5% |
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | 100 | 216.58 | +116.6% |
The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) returned +176% over 5 years vs Lazard Ltd (LAZ)'s +49%. A $10,000 investment in GS 5 years ago would be worth $27,615 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | $2.4B | $3.1B | +29.8% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | $37.9B | $126.9B | +234.8% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | $36.0B | $103.1B | +186.3% |
| Evercore Inc. (EVR) | $1.5B | $3.0B | +105.7% |
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | $1.6T | $4.5T | +187.9% |
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 16.3% | 9.1% | -44.4% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 19.5% | 11.3% | -42.4% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 16.6% | 13.0% | -21.8% |
| Evercore Inc. (EVR) | 7.4% | 12.6% | +71.0% |
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | 8.4% | 7.6% | -10.0% |
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 9 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 27.5 | 19.2 | -30.2% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 28.3 | 14.1 | -50.2% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 17 | 15.8 | -7.1% |
| Evercore Inc. (EVR) | 32.1 | 30.5 | -5.0% |
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | 0.1 | 0.1 | +0.0% |
Lazard Ltd has traded in a 9x–28x P/E range over 7 years; current trailing P/E is ~19x. The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. has traded in a 6x–28x P/E range over 8 years; current trailing P/E is ~21x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 2.92 | 2.68 | -8.2% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 17 | 40.54 | +138.5% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 2.92 | 7.95 | +172.3% |
| Evercore Inc. (EVR) | 2.43 | 9.08 | +273.7% |
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | 35.52 | 111.03 | +212.6% |
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
Lazard Ltd generated $697M FCF in 2024 (-16% vs 2021). The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. generated $-15B FCF in 2024 (-1038% vs 2021).
LAZ vs GS vs MS vs EVR vs NMR: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LAZ or GS or MS or EVR or NMR a better buy right now?
Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) offers the better valuation at 12.7x trailing P/E (11.3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lazard Ltd (LAZ) a "Buy" — based on 28 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 — LAZ or GS or MS or EVR or NMR?
On trailing P/E, Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) is the cheapest at 12.7x versus Evercore Inc. at 34.0x. On forward P/E, Nomura Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 11.3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Nomura Holdings, Inc. wins at 1.04x versus Lazard Ltd's 7.31x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LAZ or GS or MS or EVR or NMR?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) delivered a total return of +176.1%, compared to +49.2% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth approximately $28K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +662.8% versus LAZ's +103.8%. 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 — LAZ or GS or MS or EVR or NMR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) is the lower-risk stock at 1.19β versus Evercore Inc.'s 1.82β — meaning EVR is approximately 52% more volatile than NMR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Evercore Inc. (EVR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 48% versus 9% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which has better profit margins — LAZ or GS or MS or EVR or NMR?
Morgan Stanley (MS) is the more profitable company, earning 13.0% net margin versus 7.6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 13.0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EVR leads at 17.8% versus 10.5% for NMR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EVR leads at 99.4%, 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.
06Is LAZ or GS or MS or EVR or NMR 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, Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1.04x versus Lazard Ltd's 7.31x. A PEG below 1.5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) trades at 11.3x forward P/E versus 16.7x for Evercore Inc. — 5.3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EVR: 29.1% to $398.83.
07Which pays a better dividend — LAZ or GS or MS or EVR or NMR?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends. Lazard Ltd (LAZ) offers the highest yield at 3.5%, versus 1.1% for Evercore Inc. (EVR).
08Is LAZ or GS or MS or EVR or NMR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (2.3% yield, +662.8% 10Y return). Lazard Ltd (LAZ) carries a higher beta of 1.72 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MS: +662.8%, LAZ: +103.8%), 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.
09What are the main differences between LAZ and GS and MS and EVR and NMR?
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: LAZ is a small-cap income-oriented stock; GS is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MS is a large-cap quality compounder stock; EVR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; NMR is a mid-cap deep-value stock. 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 beat both.