Financial - Mortgages
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
VEL vs ESNT vs NMIH vs PFSI vs RKT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Insurance - Specialty
Insurance - Specialty
Financial - Mortgages
Financial - Mortgages
VEL vs ESNT vs NMIH vs PFSI vs RKT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Mortgages | Insurance - Specialty | Insurance - Specialty | Financial - Mortgages | Financial - Mortgages |
| Market Cap | $718M | $6.00B | $2.94B | $4.62B | $39.90B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $714M | $1.31B | $706M | $4.36B | $6.88B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $108M | $703M | $389M | $507M | $-68M |
| Gross Margin | 95.3% | 89.7% | 91.8% | 91.4% | 91.6% |
| Operating Margin | 71.6% | 63.6% | 70.8% | 34.6% | 8.7% |
| Forward P/E | 6.6x | 8.7x | 7.5x | 7.2x | 19.3x |
| Total Debt | $6.54B | $494M | $417M | $23.06B | $0.00 |
| Cash & Equiv. | $92M | $131M | $44M | $302M | $2.70B |
VEL vs ESNT vs NMIH vs PFSI vs RKT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Velocity Financial,… (VEL) | 100 | 344.4 | +244.4% |
| Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) | 100 | 172.5 | +72.5% |
| NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH) | 100 | 225.0 | +125.0% |
| PennyMac Financial … (PFSI) | 100 | 168.2 | +68.2% |
| Rocket Companies, I… (RKT) | 100 | 50.5 | -49.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: VEL vs ESNT vs NMIH vs PFSI vs RKT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
VEL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (6.6x vs 7.2x)
ESNT has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 6 yrs, beta 0.38, yield 1.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.38, Low D/E 8.8%
- Beta 0.38, yield 1.8%
- Beta 0.38 vs RKT's 1.77
NMIH is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.41 vs ESNT's 2.23
- 55.1% margin vs RKT's -1.0%
- 10.6% ROA vs RKT's -0.2%, ROIC 13.5% vs 2.0%
PFSI is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 173.8%, EPS growth 59.2%
- 6.0% 10Y total return vs NMIH's 5.1%
- 173.8% NII/revenue growth vs NMIH's 8.4%
RKT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +21.6% vs PFSI's -8.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 173.8% NII/revenue growth vs NMIH's 8.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.6x vs 7.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 55.1% margin vs RKT's -1.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.38 vs RKT's 1.77 | |
| Dividends | 1.8% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs PFSI's 1.3%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +21.6% vs PFSI's -8.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 10.6% ROA vs RKT's -0.2%, ROIC 13.5% vs 2.0% |
VEL vs ESNT vs NMIH vs PFSI vs RKT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
VEL vs ESNT vs NMIH vs PFSI vs RKT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NMIH leads in 2 of 6 categories
ESNT leads 2 • VEL leads 0 • PFSI leads 0 • RKT leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NMIH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RKT is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.9B annually — 9.7x NMIH's $706M. NMIH is the more profitable business, keeping 55.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RKT's -1.0%. On growth, NMIH holds the edge at +8.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $714M | $1.3B | $706M | $4.4B | $6.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $273M | $838M | $516M | $1.0B | $639M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $108M | $703M | $389M | $507M | -$68M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $26M | $837M | $413M | -$3.8B | -$4.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +95.3% | +89.7% | +91.8% | +91.4% | +91.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +71.6% | +63.6% | +70.8% | +34.6% | +8.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +14.7% | +53.7% | +55.1% | +11.5% | -1.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.5% | +64.0% | +58.4% | -32.4% | -58.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +0.7% | +8.4% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.8% | +1.2% | +12.1% | +7.7% | -89.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — VEL and NMIH and RKT each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.7x trailing earnings, VEL trades at a 30% valuation discount to PFSI's 9.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NMIH 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 | $718M | $6.0B | $2.9B | $4.6B | $39.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $7.2B | $6.4B | $3.3B | $27.4B | $37.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 6.65x | 8.99x | 7.84x | 9.53x | -282.60x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 6.60x | 8.68x | 7.52x | 7.17x | 19.30x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.31x | 0.43x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.95x | 7.39x | 6.27x | 18.11x | 41.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.00x | 4.74x | 4.16x | 1.06x | 5.80x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.03x | 1.17x | 1.18x | 1.11x | 0.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 40.13x | 7.03x | 7.12x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
NMIH leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
VEL delivers a 16.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $-1 for RKT. ESNT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.09x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VEL's 9.68x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), VEL scores 6/9 vs RKT's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +16.6% | +12.2% | +15.8% | +12.0% | -0.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.5% | +9.6% | +10.6% | +1.8% | -0.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.1% | +11.3% | +13.5% | +4.4% | +2.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.6% | +12.6% | +15.0% | +10.4% | +1.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 9.68x | 0.09x | 0.16x | 5.35x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $6.4B | $362M | $373M | $22.8B | -$2.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $92M | $131M | $44M | $302M | $2.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6.5B | $494M | $417M | $23.1B | $0 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.07x | 26.45x | 18.55x | 1.35x | 0.43x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — VEL and PFSI each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PFSI five years ago would be worth $16,366 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,811 for RKT. Over the past 12 months, RKT leads with a +21.6% total return vs PFSI's -8.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors VEL at 27.2% vs ESNT's 14.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -6.4% | -4.2% | -5.0% | -32.4% | -28.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +9.4% | +7.7% | +0.9% | -8.0% | +21.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +105.7% | +51.0% | +60.9% | +59.2% | +77.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +46.3% | +34.2% | +61.4% | +63.7% | -11.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +35.4% | +226.7% | +505.7% | +603.4% | -20.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +27.2% | +14.7% | +17.2% | +16.8% | +21.0% |
Risk & Volatility
ESNT leads this category, winning 2 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 RKT's 1.77 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ESNT currently trades 91.8% from its 52-week high vs PFSI's 55.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.42x | 0.38x | 0.45x | 0.93x | 1.77x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $21.39 | $67.09 | $43.20 | $160.36 | $24.36 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $16.18 | $55.22 | $34.84 | $82.67 | $11.08 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.5% | +91.8% | +89.3% | +55.3% | +58.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.1 | 50.5 | 45.2 | 40.4 | 45.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 99K | 637K | 443K | 604K | 25.0M |
Analyst Outlook
ESNT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: VEL as "Buy", ESNT as "Buy", NMIH as "Buy", PFSI as "Buy", RKT as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 61.3% upside for PFSI (target: $143) vs 12.6% for ESNT (target: $69). For income investors, ESNT offers the higher dividend yield at 1.80% vs PFSI's 1.31%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $23.00 | $69.33 | $43.50 | $143.00 | $21.63 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 19 | 20 | 20 | 25 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.8% | — | +1.3% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 6 | — | 2 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.11 | — | $1.16 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.0% | +1.9% | +3.6% | +0.1% | 0.0% |
NMIH leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ESNT leads in 2 (Risk & Volatility, Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
VEL vs ESNT vs NMIH vs PFSI vs RKT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is VEL or ESNT or NMIH or PFSI or RKT 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 8. 4% for NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH). Velocity Financial, Inc. (VEL) offers the better valuation at 6. 7x trailing P/E (6. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Velocity Financial, Inc. (VEL) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — VEL or ESNT or NMIH or PFSI or RKT?
On trailing P/E, Velocity Financial, Inc.
(VEL) is the cheapest at 6. 7x versus PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. at 9. 5x. On forward P/E, Velocity Financial, Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 6x. 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 — VEL or ESNT or NMIH or PFSI or RKT?
Over the past 5 years, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) delivered a total return of +63. 7%, compared to -11. 9% for Rocket Companies, Inc. (RKT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PFSI returned +603. 4% versus RKT's -20. 7%. 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 — VEL or ESNT or NMIH or PFSI or RKT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Essent Group Ltd.
(ESNT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 38β versus Rocket Companies, Inc. 's 1. 77β — meaning RKT is approximately 368% 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 10% for Velocity Financial, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — VEL or ESNT or NMIH or PFSI or RKT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) is pulling ahead at 173. 8% versus 8. 4% for NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. grew EPS 59. 2% year-over-year, compared to -123. 8% for Rocket Companies, 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 — VEL or ESNT or NMIH or PFSI or RKT?
Essent Group Ltd.
(ESNT) is the more profitable company, earning 57. 6% net margin versus -1. 0% for Rocket Companies, Inc. — meaning it keeps 57. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: VEL leads at 71. 6% versus 8. 7% for RKT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — VEL leads at 95. 3%, 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 VEL or ESNT or NMIH or PFSI or RKT 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, Velocity Financial, Inc. (VEL) trades at 6. 6x forward P/E versus 19. 3x for Rocket Companies, Inc. — 12. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PFSI: 61. 3% to $143. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — VEL or ESNT or NMIH or PFSI or RKT?
In this comparison, ESNT (1.
8% yield), PFSI (1. 3% yield) pay a dividend. VEL, NMIH, RKT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is VEL or ESNT or NMIH or PFSI or RKT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Essent Group Ltd.
(ESNT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 38), 1. 8% yield, +226. 7% 10Y return). Rocket Companies, Inc. (RKT) carries a higher beta of 1. 77 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ESNT: +226. 7%, RKT: -20. 7%), 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 VEL and ESNT and NMIH and PFSI and RKT?
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: VEL is a small-cap high-growth stock; ESNT is a small-cap deep-value stock; NMIH is a small-cap deep-value stock; PFSI is a small-cap high-growth stock; RKT is a mid-cap high-growth stock. ESNT, PFSI pay a dividend while VEL, NMIH, RKT do 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.