Insurance - Specialty
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NMIH vs MTG vs RDN vs ESNT vs PFSI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Insurance - Specialty
Insurance - Specialty
Insurance - Specialty
Financial - Mortgages
NMIH vs MTG vs RDN vs ESNT vs PFSI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty | Financial - Mortgages |
| Market Cap | $2.91B | $5.58B | $4.87B | $5.99B | $4.54B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $706M | $1.20B | $1.25B | $1.31B | $4.36B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $389M | $718M | $583M | $703M | $507M |
| Gross Margin | 91.8% | 93.6% | 92.3% | 89.7% | 91.4% |
| Operating Margin | 70.8% | 75.4% | 61.2% | 63.6% | 34.6% |
| Forward P/E | 7.5x | 8.6x | 7.3x | 8.7x | 7.0x |
| Total Debt | $417M | $646M | $1.13B | $494M | $23.06B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $44M | $376M | $25M | $131M | $302M |
NMIH vs MTG vs RDN vs ESNT vs PFSI — 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 | 248.9 | +148.9% |
| MGIC Investment Cor… (MTG) | 100 | 321.6 | +221.6% |
| Radian Group Inc. (RDN) | 100 | 225.1 | +125.1% |
| Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) | 100 | 185.8 | +85.8% |
| PennyMac Financial … (PFSI) | 100 | 258.9 | +158.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NMIH vs MTG vs RDN vs ESNT vs PFSI
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 0.41 vs ESNT's 2.23
- Lower P/E (7.5x vs 8.7x), PEG 0.41 vs 2.23
MTG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 336.2% 10Y total return vs PFSI's 6.2%
- 59.6% margin vs PFSI's 11.5%
- 11.0% ROA vs PFSI's 1.8%, ROIC 12.7% vs 4.4%
RDN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 0.37, yield 3.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.37, Low D/E 23.7%, current ratio 0.14x
- Beta 0.37, yield 3.0%, current ratio 0.14x
- Beta 0.37 vs PFSI's 0.93, lower leverage
Among these 5 stocks, ESNT doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
PFSI is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 173.8%, EPS growth 59.2%
- 173.8% NII/revenue growth vs RDN's -3.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 173.8% NII/revenue growth vs RDN's -3.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.5x vs 8.7x), PEG 0.41 vs 2.23 | |
| Quality / Margins | 59.6% margin vs PFSI's 11.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.37 vs PFSI's 0.93, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.0% yield, 11-year raise streak, vs ESNT's 1.8%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +9.5% vs PFSI's -8.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.0% ROA vs PFSI's 1.8%, ROIC 12.7% vs 4.4% |
NMIH vs MTG vs RDN vs ESNT vs PFSI — 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 MTG vs RDN vs ESNT vs PFSI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MTG leads in 2 of 6 categories
NMIH leads 2 • RDN leads 2 • ESNT leads 0 • PFSI leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MTG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PFSI is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.4B annually — 6.2x NMIH's $706M. MTG is the more profitable business, keeping 59.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PFSI's 11.5%. On growth, NMIH holds the edge at +8.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $706M | $1.2B | $1.2B | $1.3B | $4.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $516M | $913M | $807M | $838M | $1.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $389M | $718M | $583M | $703M | $507M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $413M | $705M | $116M | $837M | -$3.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +91.8% | +93.6% | +92.3% | +89.7% | +91.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +70.8% | +75.4% | +61.2% | +63.6% | +34.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +55.1% | +59.6% | +46.7% | +53.7% | +11.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +58.4% | +58.5% | +9.3% | +64.0% | -32.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.4% | -3.0% | -5.0% | +0.7% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +12.1% | +1.3% | +17.3% | +1.2% | +7.7% |
Valuation Metrics
NMIH leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.8x trailing earnings, NMIH trades at a 17% valuation discount to PFSI's 9.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NMIH offers better value at 0.43x vs ESNT's 2.30x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.9B | $5.6B | $4.9B | $6.0B | $4.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.3B | $5.9B | $6.0B | $6.3B | $27.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 7.77x | 8.41x | 8.63x | 8.96x | 9.35x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.46x | 8.58x | 7.25x | 8.66x | 7.04x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.43x | 0.43x | 0.55x | 2.30x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.22x | 6.26x | 7.41x | 7.37x | 18.05x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.13x | 4.60x | 3.90x | 4.72x | 1.04x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.17x | 1.16x | 1.03x | 1.17x | 1.09x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 7.06x | 6.55x | 14.47x | 7.00x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
NMIH leads this category, winning 5 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 PFSI. ESNT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.09x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PFSI's 5.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NMIH scores 5/9 vs PFSI's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +15.8% | +14.0% | +12.6% | +12.2% | +12.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +10.6% | +11.0% | +6.7% | +9.6% | +1.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +13.5% | +12.7% | +8.9% | +11.3% | +4.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +15.0% | +14.1% | +9.8% | +12.6% | +10.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.16x | 0.13x | 0.24x | 0.09x | 5.35x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $373M | $271M | $1.1B | $362M | $22.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $44M | $376M | $25M | $131M | $302M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $417M | $646M | $1.1B | $494M | $23.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 18.55x | 27.10x | 12.64x | 26.45x | 0.96x |
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 $20,311 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,466 for ESNT. Over the past 12 months, RDN leads with a +9.5% total return vs PFSI's -8.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MTG at 23.9% vs ESNT's 14.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -5.8% | -8.4% | +0.2% | -4.5% | -33.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +0.7% | +4.3% | +9.5% | +8.0% | -8.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +59.5% | +90.2% | +55.6% | +50.6% | +56.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +62.7% | +103.1% | +73.7% | +34.7% | +59.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +500.5% | +336.2% | +234.5% | +227.1% | +624.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.8% | +23.9% | +15.9% | +14.6% | +16.0% |
Risk & Volatility
RDN leads this category, winning 2 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 PFSI's 0.93 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RDN currently trades 92.0% from its 52-week high vs PFSI's 54.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.45x | 0.43x | 0.37x | 0.38x | 0.93x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $43.20 | $29.97 | $38.84 | $67.09 | $160.36 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $34.84 | $24.78 | $31.50 | $55.22 | $82.67 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +88.5% | +88.1% | +92.0% | +91.5% | +54.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.0 | 38.4 | 55.6 | 43.2 | 41.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 439K | 1.8M | 1.2M | 637K | 609K |
Analyst Outlook
RDN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NMIH as "Buy", MTG as "Buy", RDN as "Buy", ESNT as "Buy", PFSI as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 64.5% upside for PFSI (target: $143) vs 11.9% for RDN (target: $40). For income investors, RDN offers the higher dividend yield at 2.95% vs PFSI's 1.34%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $43.50 | $30.00 | $40.00 | $69.33 | $143.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 20 | 22 | 22 | 19 | 20 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.2% | +3.0% | +1.8% | +1.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 7 | 11 | 6 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.59 | $1.06 | $1.11 | $1.16 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.6% | +14.1% | +8.9% | +1.9% | +0.1% |
MTG leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). NMIH leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency).
NMIH vs MTG vs RDN vs ESNT vs PFSI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NMIH or MTG or RDN or ESNT or PFSI a better buy right now?
For growth investors, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) is the stronger pick with 173. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 4% for Radian Group Inc. (RDN). NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH) offers the better valuation at 7. 8x trailing P/E (7. 5x 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 MTG or RDN or ESNT or PFSI?
On trailing P/E, NMI Holdings, Inc.
(NMIH) is the cheapest at 7. 8x versus PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. at 9. 3x. On forward P/E, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 0x — 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. 41x versus Essent Group Ltd. 's 2. 23x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NMIH or MTG or RDN or ESNT or PFSI?
Over the past 5 years, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) delivered a total return of +103.
1%, compared to +34. 7% for Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PFSI returned +624. 6% versus ESNT's +227. 1%. 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 MTG or RDN or ESNT or PFSI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Radian Group Inc.
(RDN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 37β versus PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. 's 0. 93β — meaning PFSI is approximately 148% more volatile than RDN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% versus 5% for PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NMIH or MTG or RDN or ESNT or PFSI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) is pulling ahead at 173. 8% versus -3. 4% for Radian Group Inc. (RDN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. grew EPS 59. 2% year-over-year, compared to 5. 4% for Essent Group Ltd.. 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 MTG or RDN or ESNT or PFSI?
MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the more profitable company, earning 60.
8% net margin versus 11. 5% for PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. — 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 34. 6% for PFSI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MTG leads at 94. 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.
07Is NMIH or MTG or RDN or ESNT or PFSI 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. 41x versus Essent Group Ltd. 's 2. 23x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. (PFSI) trades at 7. 0x forward P/E versus 8. 7x for Essent Group Ltd. — 1. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PFSI: 64. 5% to $143. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NMIH or MTG or RDN or ESNT or PFSI?
In this comparison, RDN (3.
0% yield), MTG (2. 2% yield), ESNT (1. 8% yield), PFSI (1. 3% yield) pay a dividend. NMIH does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NMIH or MTG or RDN or ESNT or PFSI 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, +336. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MTG: +336. 2%, NMIH: +500. 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 MTG and RDN and ESNT and PFSI?
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; MTG is a small-cap deep-value stock; RDN is a small-cap deep-value stock; ESNT is a small-cap deep-value stock; PFSI is a small-cap high-growth stock. MTG, RDN, ESNT, PFSI 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.