Advertising Agencies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
WPP vs IPG vs OMC vs HURN vs FORR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Advertising Agencies
Advertising Agencies
Consulting Services
Consulting Services
WPP vs IPG vs OMC vs HURN vs FORR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Advertising Agencies | Advertising Agencies | Advertising Agencies | Consulting Services | Consulting Services |
| Market Cap | $4.05B | $8.93B | $23.87B | $2.02B | $125M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $29.03B | $10.21B | $19.82B | $1.74B | $397M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $584M | $552M | $63M | $104M | $-119M |
| Gross Margin | 16.3% | 18.2% | 16.8% | 23.3% | 64.6% |
| Operating Margin | 6.7% | 9.7% | 13.7% | 11.3% | -20.9% |
| Forward P/E | 7.5x | 7.8x | 7.2x | 14.2x | 8.5x |
| Total Debt | $6.35B | $4.25B | $12.78B | $548M | $72M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2.64B | $2.19B | $6.88B | $25M | $63M |
WPP vs IPG vs OMC vs HURN vs FORR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPP plc (WPP) | 100 | 49.6 | -50.4% |
| The Interpublic Gro… (IPG) | 100 | 150.0 | +50.0% |
| Omnicom Group Inc. (OMC) | 100 | 140.4 | +40.4% |
| Huron Consulting Gr… (HURN) | 100 | 269.7 | +169.7% |
| Forrester Research,… (FORR) | 100 | 20.8 | -79.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: WPP vs IPG vs OMC vs HURN vs FORR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
WPP ranks third and is worth considering specifically for dividends.
- 14.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs IPG's 5.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
IPG is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 16 yrs, beta 0.65, yield 5.4%
- Beta 0.65, yield 5.4%, current ratio 1.09x
OMC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.60, Low D/E 97.9%, current ratio 0.93x
- Lower P/E (7.2x vs 8.5x)
- Beta 0.60 vs WPP's 1.08, lower leverage
- +5.3% vs WPP's -46.1%
HURN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 14.3%, EPS growth -6.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 14.5%
- 116.8% 10Y total return vs IPG's 45.7%
- 14.3% revenue growth vs FORR's -8.2%
- 6.0% margin vs FORR's -30.1%
Among these 5 stocks, FORR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.3% revenue growth vs FORR's -8.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.2x vs 8.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 6.0% margin vs FORR's -30.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.60 vs WPP's 1.08, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 14.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs IPG's 5.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +5.3% vs WPP's -46.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.8% ROA vs FORR's -28.2%, ROIC 15.0% vs 0.8% |
WPP vs IPG vs OMC vs HURN vs FORR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
WPP vs IPG vs OMC vs HURN vs FORR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
OMC leads in 2 of 6 categories
HURN leads 2 • WPP leads 1 • IPG leads 0 • FORR leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
OMC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WPP is the larger business by revenue, generating $29.0B annually — 73.1x FORR's $397M. HURN is the more profitable business, keeping 6.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FORR's -30.1%. On growth, OMC holds the edge at +69.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $29.0B | $10.2B | $19.8B | $1.7B | $397M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.6B | $1.2B | $3.1B | $231M | -$66M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $584M | $552M | $63M | $104M | -$119M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.7B | $807M | $3.0B | $124M | $18M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +16.3% | +18.2% | +16.8% | +23.3% | +64.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.7% | +9.7% | +13.7% | +11.3% | -20.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +2.0% | +5.4% | +0.3% | +6.0% | -30.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.9% | +7.9% | +15.1% | +7.1% | +4.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -7.8% | -5.1% | +69.2% | +14.2% | -6.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -78.9% | +5.4% | +40.7% | +0.8% | -79.1% |
Valuation Metrics
WPP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 5.6x trailing earnings, WPP trades at a 74% valuation discount to HURN's 21.4x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, WPP's 3.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HURN's 11.0x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.0B | $8.9B | $23.9B | $2.0B | $125M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $9.1B | $11.0B | $29.8B | $2.5B | $134M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 5.63x | 13.43x | -284.89x | 21.37x | -1.04x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.48x | 7.78x | 7.24x | 14.18x | 8.54x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 7.78x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 3.68x | 7.52x | 10.40x | 10.99x | 8.00x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.20x | 0.83x | 1.38x | 1.19x | 0.32x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.81x | 2.37x | 1.21x | 4.25x | 0.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 2.54x | 9.77x | 8.56x | 11.06x | 6.92x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HURN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HURN delivers a 21.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $-81 for FORR. FORR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.57x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WPP's 1.70x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IPG scores 8/9 vs OMC's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +17.1% | +14.6% | +0.7% | +21.8% | -80.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.5% | +3.2% | +0.2% | +6.8% | -28.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +12.5% | +14.7% | +14.5% | +15.0% | +0.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.0% | +13.7% | +13.5% | +18.6% | +0.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 8 | 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.70x | 1.09x | 0.98x | 1.04x | 0.57x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3.7B | $2.1B | $5.9B | $524M | $9M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.6B | $2.2B | $6.9B | $25M | $63M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6.3B | $4.3B | $12.8B | $548M | $72M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.37x | 4.90x | 2.51x | 7.70x | -30.30x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HURN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HURN five years ago would be worth $22,023 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,413 for FORR. Over the past 12 months, OMC leads with a +5.3% total return vs WPP's -46.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HURN at 17.6% vs FORR's -36.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -18.2% | — | -4.4% | -27.1% | -19.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -46.1% | +1.0% | +5.3% | -17.2% | -35.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.3% | -23.0% | -7.0% | +62.5% | -74.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.1% | -10.1% | +7.2% | +120.2% | -85.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.0% | +45.7% | +23.5% | +116.8% | -75.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -23.0% | -8.4% | -2.4% | +17.6% | -36.6% |
Risk & Volatility
OMC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
OMC is the less volatile stock with a 0.60 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than WPP's 1.08 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. OMC currently trades 88.2% from its 52-week high vs WPP's 45.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.08x | 0.65x | 0.60x | 0.82x | 0.68x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $40.95 | $28.42 | $87.17 | $186.78 | $11.57 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $14.81 | $22.55 | $66.33 | $112.45 | $4.88 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +45.8% | +86.5% | +88.2% | +66.8% | +56.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 63.3 | 45.1 | 50.1 | 37.4 | 51.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 616K | 81.3M | 4.3M | 243K | 109K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — WPP and IPG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: WPP as "Hold", IPG as "Hold", OMC as "Hold", HURN as "Buy", FORR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 60.3% upside for HURN (target: $200) vs 21.8% for OMC (target: $94). For income investors, WPP offers the higher dividend yield at 14.05% vs OMC's 3.49%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $36.57 | $93.67 | $200.00 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 34 | 34 | 9 | 4 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +14.0% | +5.4% | +3.5% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | 16 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.94 | $1.31 | $2.68 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.8% | +2.6% | +3.0% | +8.2% | +2.0% |
OMC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Risk & Volatility). HURN leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
WPP vs IPG vs OMC vs HURN vs FORR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is WPP or IPG or OMC or HURN or FORR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Huron Consulting Group Inc.
(HURN) is the stronger pick with 14. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 2% for Forrester Research, Inc. (FORR). WPP plc (WPP) offers the better valuation at 5. 6x trailing P/E (7. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Huron Consulting Group Inc. (HURN) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 — WPP or IPG or OMC or HURN or FORR?
On trailing P/E, WPP plc (WPP) is the cheapest at 5.
6x versus Huron Consulting Group Inc. at 21. 4x. On forward P/E, Omnicom Group Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — WPP or IPG or OMC or HURN or FORR?
Over the past 5 years, Huron Consulting Group Inc.
(HURN) delivered a total return of +120. 2%, compared to -85. 9% for Forrester Research, Inc. (FORR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HURN returned +116. 8% versus FORR's -75. 9%. 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 — WPP or IPG or OMC or HURN or FORR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Omnicom Group Inc.
(OMC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 60β versus WPP plc's 1. 08β — meaning WPP is approximately 79% more volatile than OMC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Forrester Research, Inc. (FORR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 57% versus 170% for WPP plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — WPP or IPG or OMC or HURN or FORR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Huron Consulting Group Inc.
(HURN) is pulling ahead at 14. 3% versus -8. 2% for Forrester Research, Inc. (FORR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: WPP plc grew EPS 390. 0% year-over-year, compared to -1993. 3% for Forrester Research, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HURN leads at 14. 5% 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 — WPP or IPG or OMC or HURN or FORR?
The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc.
(IPG) is the more profitable company, earning 6. 4% net margin versus -30. 1% for Forrester Research, Inc. — meaning it keeps 6. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: OMC leads at 15. 0% versus 0. 5% for FORR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FORR leads at 53. 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 WPP or IPG or OMC or HURN or FORR more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Omnicom Group Inc.
(OMC) trades at 7. 2x forward P/E versus 14. 2x for Huron Consulting Group Inc. — 6. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HURN: 60. 3% to $200. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — WPP or IPG or OMC or HURN or FORR?
In this comparison, WPP (14.
0% yield), IPG (5. 4% yield), OMC (3. 5% yield) pay a dividend. HURN, FORR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is WPP or IPG or OMC or HURN or FORR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Omnicom Group Inc.
(OMC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 60), 3. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (OMC: +23. 5%, FORR: -75. 9%), 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 WPP and IPG and OMC and HURN and FORR?
These companies operate in different sectors (WPP (Communication Services) and IPG (Communication Services) and OMC (Communication Services) and HURN (Industrials) and FORR (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: WPP is a small-cap deep-value stock; IPG is a small-cap deep-value stock; OMC is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; HURN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FORR is a small-cap quality compounder stock. WPP, IPG, OMC pay a dividend while HURN, FORR 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.
- Sector: Communication Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Revenue Growth > 34%
- Dividend Yield > 1.3%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.