Insurance - Property & Casualty
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
STC vs ESNT vs FAF vs MTG vs FNF
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Insurance - Specialty
Insurance - Specialty
Insurance - Specialty
Insurance - Specialty
STC vs ESNT vs FAF vs MTG vs FNF — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Property & Casualty | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $2.13B | $6.00B | $7.14B | $5.62B | $13.53B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.92B | $1.31B | $6.01B | $1.20B | $14.26B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $116M | $703M | $673M | $718M | $602M |
| Gross Margin | 87.7% | 89.7% | 74.3% | 93.6% | 65.1% |
| Operating Margin | 5.7% | 63.6% | 14.8% | 75.4% | 9.8% |
| Forward P/E | 11.5x | 8.7x | 10.9x | 8.6x | 8.7x |
| Total Debt | $891M | $494M | $1.91B | $646M | $4.77B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $322M | $131M | $1.39B | $376M | $2.38B |
STC vs ESNT vs FAF vs MTG vs FNF — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stewart Information… (STC) | 100 | 226.5 | +126.5% |
| Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) | 100 | 186.4 | +86.4% |
| First American Fina… (FAF) | 100 | 138.2 | +38.2% |
| MGIC Investment Cor… (MTG) | 100 | 323.8 | +223.8% |
| Fidelity National F… (FNF) | 100 | 164.0 | +64.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: STC vs ESNT vs FAF vs MTG vs FNF
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, STC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ESNT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.38, Low D/E 8.8%
- Beta 0.38 vs STC's 0.78, lower leverage
FAF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 21.6%, EPS growth 376.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -0.7%
- 21.6% revenue growth vs MTG's 0.5%
- +17.8% vs FNF's -18.7%
MTG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 333.0% 10Y total return vs ESNT's 226.7%
- PEG 0.44 vs ESNT's 2.23
- Lower P/E (8.6x vs 10.9x)
- Combined ratio 0.2 vs STC's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting)
FNF is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 0.58, yield 4.0%
- Beta 0.58, yield 4.0%, current ratio 2.44x
- 4.0% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs FAF's 3.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 21.6% revenue growth vs MTG's 0.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.6x vs 10.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Combined ratio 0.2 vs STC's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.38 vs STC's 0.78, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.0% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs FAF's 3.1% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +17.8% vs FNF's -18.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.0% ROA vs FNF's 0.6%, ROIC 12.7% vs 10.1% |
STC vs ESNT vs FAF vs MTG vs FNF — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
STC vs ESNT vs FAF vs MTG vs FNF — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MTG leads in 4 of 6 categories
STC leads 0 • ESNT leads 0 • FAF leads 0 • FNF leads 0 • 2 tied
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)
FNF is the larger business by revenue, generating $14.3B annually — 11.8x MTG's $1.2B. MTG is the more profitable business, keeping 59.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to STC's 4.0%. On growth, STC holds the edge at +18.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.9B | $1.3B | $6.0B | $1.2B | $14.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $227M | $838M | $1.1B | $913M | $2.2B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $116M | $703M | $673M | $718M | $602M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $132M | $837M | $824M | $705M | $6.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +87.7% | +89.7% | +74.3% | +93.6% | +65.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +5.7% | +63.6% | +14.8% | +75.4% | +9.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.0% | +53.7% | +11.2% | +59.6% | +4.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.5% | +64.0% | +13.7% | +58.5% | +42.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +18.7% | +0.7% | -90.9% | -3.0% | +15.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +56.3% | +1.2% | +70.4% | +1.3% | -126.1% |
Valuation Metrics
MTG leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.5x trailing earnings, MTG trades at a 63% valuation discount to FNF's 22.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MTG offers better value at 0.43x vs ESNT's 2.31x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.1B | $6.0B | $7.1B | $5.6B | $13.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.7B | $6.4B | $7.7B | $5.9B | $15.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 17.28x | 8.99x | 11.63x | 8.46x | 22.75x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.50x | 8.68x | 10.87x | 8.64x | 8.69x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.31x | — | 0.43x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.91x | 7.39x | 7.34x | 6.30x | 7.00x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.73x | 4.74x | 0.96x | 4.63x | 0.93x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.23x | 1.17x | 1.32x | 1.17x | 1.52x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 16.10x | 7.03x | 9.36x | 6.60x | 2.12x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MTG leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MTG delivers a 14.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $7 for FNF. ESNT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.09x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to STC's 0.54x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FAF scores 8/9 vs STC's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +7.7% | +12.2% | +12.5% | +14.0% | +6.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.0% | +9.6% | +4.0% | +11.0% | +0.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.2% | +11.3% | +10.7% | +12.7% | +10.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.5% | +12.6% | +5.3% | +14.1% | +1.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.54x | 0.09x | 0.35x | 0.13x | 0.53x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $569M | $362M | $519M | $271M | $2.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $322M | $131M | $1.4B | $376M | $2.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $891M | $494M | $1.9B | $646M | $4.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 8.82x | 26.45x | 6.45x | 27.10x | 6.77x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MTG leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MTG five years ago would be worth $20,097 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,070 for FAF. Over the past 12 months, FAF leads with a +17.8% total return vs FNF's -18.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MTG at 24.2% vs FAF's 9.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +0.5% | -4.2% | +15.1% | -7.8% | -6.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +11.5% | +7.7% | +17.8% | +4.2% | -18.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +79.3% | +51.0% | +30.7% | +91.5% | +63.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +28.1% | +34.2% | +20.7% | +101.0% | +33.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +133.4% | +226.7% | +138.4% | +333.0% | +170.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +21.5% | +14.7% | +9.3% | +24.2% | +17.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ESNT and FAF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ESNT is the less volatile stock with a 0.38 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than STC's 0.78 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FAF currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs FNF's 77.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.78x | 0.38x | 0.59x | 0.43x | 0.58x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $78.61 | $67.09 | $71.47 | $29.97 | $64.98 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $56.39 | $55.22 | $53.09 | $24.78 | $42.78 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +88.8% | +91.8% | +97.6% | +88.7% | +77.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.6 | 50.5 | 62.4 | 40.4 | 58.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 204K | 637K | 945K | 1.9M | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — STC and FAF and FNF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: STC as "Buy", ESNT as "Buy", FAF as "Buy", MTG as "Buy", FNF as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 33.3% upside for FNF (target: $67) vs 12.6% for ESNT (target: $69). For income investors, FNF offers the higher dividend yield at 3.99% vs ESNT's 1.80%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $80.50 | $69.33 | $83.00 | $30.00 | $67.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 19 | 15 | 22 | 17 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.9% | +1.8% | +3.1% | +2.2% | +4.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 15 | 6 | 15 | 7 | 10 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.01 | $1.11 | $2.15 | $0.59 | $2.01 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.2% | +1.9% | +1.7% | +14.0% | +2.1% |
MTG leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics. 2 categories are tied.
STC vs ESNT vs FAF vs MTG vs FNF: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is STC or ESNT or FAF or MTG or FNF 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). MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) offers the better valuation at 8. 5x trailing P/E (8. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Stewart Information Services Corporation (STC) a "Buy" — based on 8 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 — STC or ESNT or FAF or MTG or FNF?
On trailing P/E, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the cheapest at 8.
5x versus Fidelity National Financial, Inc. at 22. 7x. On forward P/E, MGIC Investment Corporation is actually cheaper at 8. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: MGIC Investment Corporation wins at 0. 44x 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 — STC or ESNT or FAF or MTG or FNF?
Over the past 5 years, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) delivered a total return of +101.
0%, compared to +20. 7% for First American Financial Corporation (FAF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MTG returned +333. 0% versus STC's +133. 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 — STC or ESNT or FAF or MTG or FNF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Essent Group Ltd.
(ESNT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 38β versus Stewart Information Services Corporation's 0. 78β — meaning STC is approximately 106% more volatile than ESNT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% versus 54% for Stewart Information Services Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — STC or ESNT or FAF or MTG or FNF?
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 -52. 5% for Fidelity National Financial, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FNF leads at 8. 2% 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 — STC or ESNT or FAF or MTG or FNF?
MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the more profitable company, earning 60.
8% net margin versus 4. 0% for Stewart Information Services 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 5. 7% for STC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FNF leads at 98. 2%, 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 STC or ESNT or FAF or MTG or FNF 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, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 44x 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, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) trades at 8. 6x forward P/E versus 11. 5x for Stewart Information Services Corporation — 2. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FNF: 33. 3% to $67. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — STC or ESNT or FAF or MTG or FNF?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Fidelity National Financial, Inc. (FNF) offers the highest yield at 4. 0%, versus 1. 8% for Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT).
09Is STC or ESNT or FAF or MTG or FNF 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, +333. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MTG: +333. 0%, STC: +133. 4%), 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 STC and ESNT and FAF and MTG and FNF?
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: STC is a small-cap high-growth stock; ESNT is a small-cap deep-value stock; FAF is a small-cap high-growth stock; MTG is a small-cap deep-value stock; FNF is a mid-cap income-oriented 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.