Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare Lazard Ltd (LAZ) 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 | LAZ | 21.0% revenue growth vs NMR's 13.4% |
| Value | NMR | Lower P/E (11.3x vs 13.9x), PEG 1.04 vs 7.31 |
| Quality / Margins | LAZ | 9.1% net margin vs NMR's 7.6% |
| Stability / Safety | NMR | Beta 1.19 vs LAZ's 1.72 |
| Dividends | LAZ | 3.5% yield, vs NMR's 2.6% |
| Momentum (1Y) | NMR | +45.9% vs LAZ's +4.9% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | LAZ | 5.9% ROA vs NMR's 0.6%, ROIC 10.2% 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.
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 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
NMR leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). LAZ leads in 2 (Financial Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
NMR is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.51T annually — 1460.2x LAZ's $3.1B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 9.1% (LAZ) to 7.6% (NMR).
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.1B | $4.51T |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $384M | $533.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $273M | $370.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $468M | $0 |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.1% | +36.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +12.5% | +10.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +9.1% | +7.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +22.6% | -19.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -34.3% | -5.5% |
Valuation Metrics
At 12.7x trailing earnings, NMR trades at a 33% valuation discount to LAZ's 18.9x 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 | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.8B | $26.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.6B | $192.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 18.88x | 12.66x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.85x | 11.35x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 9.97x | 1.16x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.32x | 56.19x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.54x | 0.92x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.77x | 1.20x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.81x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
LAZ delivers a 28.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $29 in annual profit, vs $10 for NMR. LAZ carries lower financial leverage with a 2.87x 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 NMR's 7/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +28.6% | +10.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.9% | +0.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.2% | +1.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.3% | +2.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.87x | 8.75x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $884M | $25.83T |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.3B | $5.51T |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.2B | $31.35T |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.01x | 0.20x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in NMR five years ago would be worth $16,957 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 NMR at 33.4% vs LAZ's 14.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.7% | +6.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +4.9% | +45.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +51.5% | +137.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +49.2% | +69.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +103.8% | +160.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.9% | +33.4% |
Risk & Volatility
NMR is the less volatile stock with a 1.19 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LAZ's 1.72 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 LAZ's 86.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.72x | 1.19x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $58.75 | $9.58 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $31.97 | $4.86 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +86.1% | +93.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.7 | 53.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 807K | 1.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates LAZ as "Buy" and NMR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 8.0% upside for LAZ (target: $55) vs -35.7% for NMR (target: $6). For income investors, LAZ offers the higher dividend yield at 3.46% vs NMR's 2.61%.
| Metric | LAZLazard Ltd | NMRNomura Holdings, … |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $54.67 | $5.79 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 28 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.5% | +2.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.75 | $36.70 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.3% | +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 | 141.77 | +41.8% |
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | 100 | 188.21 | +88.2% |
Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) returned +70% over 5 years vs Lazard Ltd (LAZ)'s +49%. A $10,000 investment in NMR 5 years ago would be worth $16,957 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | $2.4B | $3.1B | +29.8% |
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | $1.6T | $4.5T | +187.9% |
Nomura Holdings, Inc.'s revenue grew from $1.6T (2016) to $4.5T (2025) — a 12.5% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 16.3% | 9.1% | -44.4% |
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | 8.4% | 7.6% | -10.0% |
Nomura Holdings, Inc.'s net margin went from 8% (2016) to 8% (2025).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 9 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 27.5 | 19.2 | -30.2% |
| 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. Nomura Holdings, Inc. has traded in a 0x–0x P/E range over 8 years; current trailing P/E is ~13x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 2.92 | 2.68 | -8.2% |
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | 35.52 | 111.03 | +212.6% |
Nomura Holdings, Inc.'s EPS grew from $35.52 (2016) to $111.03 (2025) — a 14% CAGR.
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
Lazard Ltd generated $697M FCF in 2024 (-16% vs 2021). Nomura Holdings, Inc. generated $-869B FCF in 2025 (-259% vs 2021).
LAZ vs NMR: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LAZ 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 NMR?
On trailing P/E, Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) is the cheapest at 12.7x versus Lazard Ltd at 18.9x. 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 NMR?
Over the past 5 years, Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) delivered a total return of +69.6%, compared to +49.2% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). A $10,000 investment in NMR five years ago would be worth approximately $17K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NMR returned +160.8% 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 NMR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) is the lower-risk stock at 1.19β versus Lazard Ltd's 1.72β — meaning LAZ is approximately 44% more volatile than NMR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lazard Ltd (LAZ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 9% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which has better profit margins — LAZ or NMR?
Lazard Ltd (LAZ) is the more profitable company, earning 9.1% net margin versus 7.6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 9.1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LAZ leads at 12.5% versus 10.5% for NMR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NMR leads at 36.9%, 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 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 13.9x for Lazard Ltd — 2.5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LAZ: 8.0% to $54.67.
07Which pays a better dividend — LAZ or NMR?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends. Lazard Ltd (LAZ) offers the highest yield at 3.5%, versus 2.6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR).
08Is LAZ or NMR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.19), 2.6% yield, +160.8% 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 (NMR: +160.8%, 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 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; 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.