Financial - Capital Markets
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PWP vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
PWP vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $1.91B | $13.11B | $4.36B | $3.70B | $4.69B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $751M | $3.88B | $3.19B | $1.71B | $1.52B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $20M | $592M | $237M | $187M | $233M |
| Gross Margin | 97.2% | 99.4% | 31.8% | 32.4% | 99.2% |
| Operating Margin | 6.4% | 20.5% | 13.0% | 21.2% | 18.1% |
| Forward P/E | 17.1x | 17.5x | 14.5x | 20.5x | 20.8x |
| Total Debt | $354M | $1.16B | $2.58B | $414M | $267M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $256M | $1.47B | $1.50B | $539M | $509M |
PWP vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Perella Weinberg Pa… (PWP) | 100 | 179.7 | +79.7% |
| Evercore Inc. (EVR) | 100 | 364.1 | +264.1% |
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 100 | 124.4 | +24.4% |
| PJT Partners Inc. (PJT) | 100 | 221.1 | +121.1% |
| Moelis & Company (MC) | 100 | 162.9 | +62.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PWP vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PWP lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
EVR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 29.5%, EPS growth 54.7%
- 6.1% 10Y total return vs PJT's 6.0%
- PEG 1.55 vs PJT's 2.36
- 29.5% NII/revenue growth vs PWP's -14.5%
Among these 5 stocks, LAZ doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
PJT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.10, Low D/E 41.0%, current ratio 27.67x
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs PWP's 0.9% (lower = leaner)
- Beta 1.10 vs EVR's 1.90, lower leverage
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs PWP's 0.9%
MC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 1.75, yield 4.1%
- Beta 1.75, yield 4.1%, current ratio 21.47x
- 4.1% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs PJT's 0.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 29.5% NII/revenue growth vs PWP's -14.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (17.5x vs 20.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs PWP's 0.9% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.10 vs EVR's 1.90, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.1% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs PJT's 0.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +60.9% vs PJT's +8.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs PWP's 0.9% |
PWP vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
PWP vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MC leads in 2 of 6 categories
EVR leads 1 • PWP leads 0 • LAZ leads 0 • PJT leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — EVR and MC each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EVR is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.9B annually — 5.2x PWP's $751M. MC is the more profitable business, keeping 15.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PWP's 4.7%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $751M | $3.9B | $3.2B | $1.7B | $1.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $45M | $804M | $384M | $412M | $286M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $20M | $592M | $237M | $187M | $233M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $96M | $1.2B | $519M | $614M | $540M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +97.2% | +99.4% | +31.8% | +32.4% | +99.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.4% | +20.5% | +13.0% | +21.2% | +18.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.7% | +15.3% | +7.4% | +10.5% | +15.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.1% | +30.5% | +15.9% | +28.0% | +35.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -91.7% | +44.2% | -43.8% | +11.1% | -4.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — LAZ and PJT each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.4x trailing earnings, LAZ trades at a 37% valuation discount to PWP's 34.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), EVR offers better value at 2.08x vs PJT's 2.63x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.9B | $13.1B | $4.4B | $3.7B | $4.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.0B | $12.8B | $5.4B | $3.6B | $4.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 34.24x | 23.56x | 21.40x | 22.93x | 21.74x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 17.08x | 17.50x | 14.52x | 20.52x | 20.83x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.08x | — | 2.63x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 29.16x | 15.91x | 12.09x | 9.08x | 15.58x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.54x | 3.38x | 1.37x | 2.16x | 3.09x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.64x | 6.33x | 4.99x | 4.34x | 7.44x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 62.67x | 11.09x | 8.63x | 7.71x | 8.69x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MC leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MC delivers a 37.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $38 in annual profit, vs $16 for PWP. MC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.39x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LAZ's 2.61x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PJT scores 7/9 vs PWP's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +16.3% | +29.3% | +26.7% | +20.1% | +37.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.0% | +14.1% | +5.2% | +11.1% | +15.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.0% | +18.8% | +9.5% | +20.3% | +24.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.7% | +17.6% | +9.5% | +21.2% | +22.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.36x | 0.50x | 2.61x | 0.41x | 0.39x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $98M | -$311M | $1.1B | -$125M | -$241M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $256M | $1.5B | $1.5B | $539M | $509M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $354M | $1.2B | $2.6B | $414M | $267M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 32.72x | 4.74x | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
EVR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in EVR five years ago would be worth $23,623 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,061 for LAZ. Over the past 12 months, EVR leads with a +60.9% total return vs PJT's +8.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EVR at 46.8% vs LAZ's 21.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.7% | -5.5% | -5.6% | -9.5% | -9.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +14.0% | +60.9% | +17.8% | +8.3% | +24.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +145.0% | +216.3% | +80.2% | +152.7% | +104.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +73.8% | +136.2% | +20.6% | +122.3% | +50.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +103.6% | +613.3% | +100.4% | +600.7% | +262.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +34.8% | +46.8% | +21.7% | +36.2% | +26.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — EVR and PJT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PJT is the less volatile stock with a 1.10 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than EVR's 1.90 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EVR currently trades 85.2% from its 52-week high vs PWP's 72.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.85x | 1.90x | 1.79x | 1.10x | 1.75x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $25.93 | $388.71 | $58.75 | $195.62 | $78.22 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.74 | $206.63 | $38.67 | $127.73 | $51.06 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.6% | +85.2% | +79.0% | +78.3% | +81.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.5 | 53.0 | 50.9 | 51.2 | 49.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 852K | 622K | 1.5M | 364K | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
MC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PWP as "Buy", EVR as "Buy", LAZ as "Buy", PJT as "Hold", MC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 15.6% upside for EVR (target: $383) vs 1.9% for LAZ (target: $47). For income investors, MC offers the higher dividend yield at 4.12% vs PJT's 0.56%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $20.25 | $382.67 | $47.33 | $158.67 | $73.40 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 21 | 29 | 12 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.9% | +1.0% | +3.8% | +0.6% | +4.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.36 | $3.25 | $1.75 | $0.86 | $2.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.8% | +5.0% | +2.1% | +5.3% | +1.6% |
MC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). EVR leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
PWP vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PWP or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Evercore Inc.
(EVR) is the stronger pick with 29. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -14. 5% for Perella Weinberg Partners (PWP). Lazard Ltd (LAZ) offers the better valuation at 21. 4x trailing P/E (14. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Perella Weinberg Partners (PWP) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — PWP or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
On trailing P/E, Lazard Ltd (LAZ) is the cheapest at 21.
4x versus Perella Weinberg Partners at 34. 2x. On forward P/E, Lazard Ltd is actually cheaper at 14. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Evercore Inc. wins at 1. 55x versus PJT Partners Inc. 's 2. 36x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PWP or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
Over the past 5 years, Evercore Inc.
(EVR) delivered a total return of +136. 2%, compared to +20. 6% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EVR returned +613. 3% versus LAZ's +100. 4%. 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 — PWP or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), PJT Partners Inc.
(PJT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 10β versus Evercore Inc. 's 1. 90β — meaning EVR is approximately 73% more volatile than PJT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Moelis & Company (MC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 39% versus 3% for Lazard Ltd — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PWP or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Evercore Inc.
(EVR) is pulling ahead at 29. 5% versus -14. 5% for Perella Weinberg Partners (PWP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Perella Weinberg Partners grew EPS 145. 1% year-over-year, compared to -19. 0% for Lazard Ltd. 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 — PWP or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
Moelis & Company (MC) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
4% net margin versus 4. 7% for Perella Weinberg Partners — meaning it keeps 15. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PJT leads at 21. 2% versus 6. 4% for PWP. 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.
07Is PWP or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC 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, Evercore Inc. (EVR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 55x versus PJT Partners Inc. 's 2. 36x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Lazard Ltd (LAZ) trades at 14. 5x forward P/E versus 20. 8x for Moelis & Company — 6. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EVR: 15. 6% to $382. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — PWP or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Moelis & Company (MC) offers the highest yield at 4. 1%, versus 0. 6% for PJT Partners Inc. (PJT).
09Is PWP or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, PJT Partners Inc.
(PJT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 10), 0. 6% yield, +600. 7% 10Y return). Perella Weinberg Partners (PWP) carries a higher beta of 1. 85 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PJT: +600. 7%, PWP: +103. 6%), 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 PWP and EVR and LAZ and PJT and MC?
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: PWP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; EVR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; LAZ is a small-cap income-oriented stock; PJT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MC is a small-cap high-growth 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 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.