Insurance - Specialty
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NMIH vs FNF vs FAF vs MTG vs RDN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Insurance - Specialty
Insurance - Specialty
Insurance - Specialty
Insurance - Specialty
NMIH vs FNF vs FAF vs MTG vs RDN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $2.87B | $13.87B | $7.00B | $5.55B | $4.82B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $706M | $13.72B | $6.01B | $1.20B | $1.26B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $389M | $1.17B | $673M | $718M | $576M |
| Gross Margin | 91.8% | 53.3% | 74.3% | 93.6% | 92.1% |
| Operating Margin | 70.8% | 11.6% | 14.8% | 75.4% | 59.5% |
| Forward P/E | 7.3x | 8.9x | 10.7x | 8.5x | 7.2x |
| Total Debt | $417M | $4.71B | $1.91B | $646M | $2.34B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $44M | $3.41B | $1.39B | $376M | $39M |
NMIH vs FNF vs FAF vs MTG vs RDN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH) | 100 | 245.1 | +145.1% |
| Fidelity National F… (FNF) | 100 | 166.9 | +66.9% |
| First American Fina… (FAF) | 100 | 135.4 | +35.4% |
| MGIC Investment Cor… (MTG) | 100 | 319.6 | +219.6% |
| Radian Group Inc. (RDN) | 100 | 224.1 | +124.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NMIH vs FNF vs FAF vs MTG vs RDN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NMIH ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.40 vs FNF's 2.24
- Lower P/E (7.3x vs 8.5x), PEG 0.40 vs 0.44
FNF is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 3.8% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs FAF's 3.1%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
FAF has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 21.6%, EPS growth 376.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -0.7%
- 21.6% revenue growth vs MTG's 0.5%
- +14.7% vs FNF's -17.6%
MTG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 324.6% 10Y total return vs NMIH's 478.5%
- Combined ratio 0.2 vs FAF's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting)
- 11.0% ROA vs FNF's 1.1%, ROIC 12.7% vs 13.7%
RDN is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 0.37, yield 2.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.37, Low D/E 50.7%, current ratio 42.96x
- Beta 0.37, yield 2.8%, current ratio 42.96x
- Beta 0.37 vs FAF's 0.59
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 21.6% revenue growth vs MTG's 0.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.3x vs 8.5x), PEG 0.40 vs 0.44 | |
| Quality / Margins | Combined ratio 0.2 vs FAF's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.37 vs FAF's 0.59 | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs FAF's 3.1%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +14.7% vs FNF's -17.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.0% ROA vs FNF's 1.1%, ROIC 12.7% vs 13.7% |
NMIH vs FNF vs FAF vs MTG vs RDN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
NMIH vs FNF vs FAF vs MTG vs RDN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MTG leads in 3 of 6 categories
NMIH leads 1 • FNF leads 0 • FAF leads 0 • RDN leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MTG leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FNF is the larger business by revenue, generating $13.7B annually — 19.4x NMIH's $706M. MTG is the more profitable business, keeping 59.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FNF's 8.5%. On growth, FNF holds the edge at +11.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $706M | $13.7B | $6.0B | $1.2B | $1.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $516M | $2.4B | $1.1B | $913M | $821M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $389M | $1.2B | $673M | $718M | $576M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $413M | $5.7B | $824M | $705M | -$560M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +91.8% | +53.3% | +74.3% | +93.6% | +92.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +70.8% | +11.6% | +14.8% | +75.4% | +59.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +55.1% | +8.5% | +11.2% | +59.6% | +45.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +58.4% | +41.4% | +13.7% | +58.5% | -44.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.4% | +11.9% | -90.9% | -3.0% | -2.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +12.1% | +37.1% | +70.4% | +1.3% | +4.0% |
Valuation Metrics
NMIH leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.7x trailing earnings, NMIH trades at a 33% valuation discount to FAF's 11.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NMIH offers better value at 0.42x vs FNF's 2.78x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.9B | $13.9B | $7.0B | $5.5B | $4.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.2B | $15.2B | $7.5B | $5.8B | $7.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 7.65x | 11.01x | 11.40x | 8.36x | 9.08x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.34x | 8.85x | 10.66x | 8.53x | 7.22x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.42x | 2.78x | — | 0.43x | 2.19x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.14x | 6.11x | 7.21x | 6.22x | 8.38x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.06x | 1.04x | 0.94x | 4.57x | 3.73x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.15x | 1.64x | 1.29x | 1.15x | 1.19x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.95x | 2.08x | 9.17x | 6.52x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
MTG leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NMIH delivers a 15.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $12 for RDN. MTG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FNF's 0.55x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FAF scores 8/9 vs RDN's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +15.8% | +12.5% | +12.5% | +14.0% | +12.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +10.6% | +1.1% | +4.0% | +11.0% | +7.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +13.5% | +13.7% | +10.7% | +12.7% | +9.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +15.0% | +2.0% | +5.3% | +14.1% | +10.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.16x | 0.55x | 0.35x | 0.13x | 0.51x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $373M | $1.3B | $519M | $271M | $2.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $44M | $3.4B | $1.4B | $376M | $39M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $417M | $4.7B | $1.9B | $646M | $2.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 18.55x | 7.66x | 6.45x | 27.10x | 9.53x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MTG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MTG five years ago would be worth $19,005 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,096 for FAF. Over the past 12 months, FAF leads with a +14.7% total return vs FNF's -17.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MTG at 23.4% vs FAF's 8.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -7.3% | -4.8% | +12.9% | -9.5% | -0.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +0.5% | -17.6% | +14.7% | +3.0% | +8.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +59.2% | +67.0% | +28.4% | +88.0% | +55.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +50.3% | +37.0% | +21.0% | +90.0% | +69.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +478.5% | +181.8% | +137.3% | +324.6% | +230.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.8% | +18.6% | +8.7% | +23.4% | +15.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FAF and RDN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
RDN is the less volatile stock with a 0.37 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FAF's 0.59 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FAF currently trades 95.7% from its 52-week high vs FNF's 78.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.45x | 0.58x | 0.59x | 0.43x | 0.37x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $43.20 | $65.21 | $71.47 | $29.97 | $38.84 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $34.84 | $42.78 | $53.09 | $24.78 | $31.50 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.2% | +78.5% | +95.7% | +87.6% | +91.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 35.5 | 57.5 | 57.5 | 37.5 | 54.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 435K | 1.9M | 944K | 1.8M | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FNF and FAF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NMIH as "Buy", FNF as "Buy", FAF as "Buy", MTG as "Buy", RDN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 30.9% upside for FNF (target: $67) vs 12.4% for RDN (target: $40). For income investors, FNF offers the higher dividend yield at 3.81% vs MTG's 2.24%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $43.50 | $67.00 | $83.00 | $30.00 | $40.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 20 | 17 | 15 | 22 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.8% | +3.1% | +2.2% | +2.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 9 | 15 | 7 | 10 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.95 | $2.15 | $0.59 | $0.99 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.7% | +0.2% | +1.7% | +14.2% | +4.7% |
MTG leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NMIH leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
NMIH vs FNF vs FAF vs MTG vs RDN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NMIH or FNF or FAF or MTG or RDN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, First American Financial Corporation (FAF) is the stronger pick with 21.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 5% for MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG). NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH) offers the better valuation at 7. 7x trailing P/E (7. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH) a "Buy" — based on 20 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 — NMIH or FNF or FAF or MTG or RDN?
On trailing P/E, NMI Holdings, Inc.
(NMIH) is the cheapest at 7. 7x versus First American Financial Corporation at 11. 4x. On forward P/E, Radian Group Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 2x — 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: NMI Holdings, Inc. wins at 0. 40x versus Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 's 2. 24x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NMIH or FNF or FAF or MTG or RDN?
Over the past 5 years, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) delivered a total return of +90.
0%, compared to +21. 0% for First American Financial Corporation (FAF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NMIH returned +478. 5% versus FAF's +137. 3%. 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 — NMIH or FNF or FAF or MTG or RDN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Radian Group Inc.
(RDN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 37β versus First American Financial Corporation's 0. 59β — meaning FAF is approximately 59% more volatile than RDN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 55% for Fidelity National Financial, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NMIH or FNF or FAF or MTG or RDN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), First American Financial Corporation (FAF) is pulling ahead at 21.
6% versus 0. 5% for MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: First American Financial Corporation grew EPS 376. 2% year-over-year, compared to 4. 0% for Radian Group Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NMIH leads at 10. 4% annualised revenue growth. 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 — NMIH or FNF or FAF or MTG or RDN?
MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the more profitable company, earning 60.
8% net margin versus 8. 4% for First American Financial Corporation — meaning it keeps 60. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MTG leads at 76. 5% versus 11. 1% for FAF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FAF leads at 95. 6%, 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 NMIH or FNF or FAF or MTG or RDN 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, NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 40x versus Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 's 2. 24x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Radian Group Inc. (RDN) trades at 7. 2x forward P/E versus 10. 7x for First American Financial Corporation — 3. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FNF: 30. 9% to $67. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NMIH or FNF or FAF or MTG or RDN?
In this comparison, FNF (3.
8% yield), FAF (3. 1% yield), RDN (2. 8% yield), MTG (2. 2% yield) pay a dividend. NMIH does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NMIH or FNF or FAF or MTG or RDN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
43), 2. 2% yield, +324. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MTG: +324. 6%, NMIH: +478. 5%), 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 NMIH and FNF and FAF and MTG and RDN?
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: NMIH is a small-cap deep-value stock; FNF is a mid-cap high-growth stock; FAF is a small-cap high-growth stock; MTG is a small-cap deep-value stock; RDN is a small-cap deep-value stock. FNF, FAF, MTG, RDN pay a dividend while NMIH does 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.