HRTG Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Allstate has a net margin of 3.85% compared to Heritage Insurance Holdings's net margin of 7.16%. Heritage Insurance Holdings's return on equity of 31.63% beat Allstate's return on equity of 23.5%.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a consensus price target of $16.00, signalling upside risk potential of 35.82%. On the other hand Allstate has an analysts' consensus of $224.06 which suggests that it could grow by 16.82%. Given that Heritage Insurance Holdings has higher upside potential than Allstate, analysts believe Heritage Insurance Holdings is more attractive than Allstate.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a beta of 1.032, which suggesting that the stock is 3.17% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Allstate has a beta of 0.520, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 47.975%.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Allstate offers a yield of 1.92% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.92 per share. Heritage Insurance Holdings pays 0.02% of its earnings as a dividend. Allstate pays out -548.94% of its earnings as a dividend. Heritage Insurance Holdings's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Heritage Insurance Holdings quarterly revenues are $211.8M, which are smaller than Allstate quarterly revenues of $16.6B. Heritage Insurance Holdings's net income of $8.2M is lower than Allstate's net income of $1.2B. Notably, Heritage Insurance Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is 4.71x while Allstate's PE ratio is 12.42x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Heritage Insurance Holdings is 0.44x versus 0.82x for Allstate. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

The Hartford Financial Services Group has a net margin of 3.85% compared to Heritage Insurance Holdings's net margin of 11.42%. Heritage Insurance Holdings's return on equity of 31.63% beat The Hartford Financial Services Group's return on equity of 19.63%.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a consensus price target of $16.00, signalling upside risk potential of 35.82%. On the other hand The Hartford Financial Services Group has an analysts' consensus of $129.65 which suggests that it could grow by 18.49%. Given that Heritage Insurance Holdings has higher upside potential than The Hartford Financial Services Group, analysts believe Heritage Insurance Holdings is more attractive than The Hartford Financial Services Group.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a beta of 1.032, which suggesting that the stock is 3.17% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison The Hartford Financial Services Group has a beta of 0.977, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 2.346%.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. The Hartford Financial Services Group offers a yield of 1.76% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.52 per share. Heritage Insurance Holdings pays 0.02% of its earnings as a dividend. The Hartford Financial Services Group pays out 21.93% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Heritage Insurance Holdings quarterly revenues are $211.8M, which are smaller than The Hartford Financial Services Group quarterly revenues of $6.7B. Heritage Insurance Holdings's net income of $8.2M is lower than The Hartford Financial Services Group's net income of $767M. Notably, Heritage Insurance Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is 4.71x while The Hartford Financial Services Group's PE ratio is 10.96x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Heritage Insurance Holdings is 0.44x versus 1.27x for The Hartford Financial Services Group. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Progressive has a net margin of 3.85% compared to Heritage Insurance Holdings's net margin of 11.84%. Heritage Insurance Holdings's return on equity of 31.63% beat Progressive's return on equity of 36.88%.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a consensus price target of $16.00, signalling upside risk potential of 35.82%. On the other hand Progressive has an analysts' consensus of $277.8235 which suggests that it could grow by 14.05%. Given that Heritage Insurance Holdings has higher upside potential than Progressive, analysts believe Heritage Insurance Holdings is more attractive than Progressive.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a beta of 1.032, which suggesting that the stock is 3.17% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Progressive has a beta of 0.411, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 58.864%.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Progressive offers a yield of 0.47% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $4.60 per share. Heritage Insurance Holdings pays 0.02% of its earnings as a dividend. Progressive pays out 7.11% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Heritage Insurance Holdings quarterly revenues are $211.8M, which are smaller than Progressive quarterly revenues of $19.7B. Heritage Insurance Holdings's net income of $8.2M is lower than Progressive's net income of $2.3B. Notably, Heritage Insurance Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is 4.71x while Progressive's PE ratio is 17.70x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Heritage Insurance Holdings is 0.44x versus 1.99x for Progressive. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Universal Insurance Holdings has a net margin of 3.85% compared to Heritage Insurance Holdings's net margin of -4.17%. Heritage Insurance Holdings's return on equity of 31.63% beat Universal Insurance Holdings's return on equity of 20.24%.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a consensus price target of $16.00, signalling upside risk potential of 35.82%. On the other hand Universal Insurance Holdings has an analysts' consensus of $25.00 which suggests that it could grow by 37.27%. Given that Universal Insurance Holdings has higher upside potential than Heritage Insurance Holdings, analysts believe Universal Insurance Holdings is more attractive than Heritage Insurance Holdings.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a beta of 1.032, which suggesting that the stock is 3.17% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Universal Insurance Holdings has a beta of 0.936, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 6.359%.

Heritage Insurance Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Universal Insurance Holdings offers a yield of 3.25% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.29 per share. Heritage Insurance Holdings pays 0.02% of its earnings as a dividend. Universal Insurance Holdings pays out 34.85% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Heritage Insurance Holdings quarterly revenues are $211.8M, which are smaller than Universal Insurance Holdings quarterly revenues of $387.6M. Heritage Insurance Holdings's net income of $8.2M is higher than Universal Insurance Holdings's net income of -$16.2M. Notably, Heritage Insurance Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is 4.71x while Universal Insurance Holdings's PE ratio is 8.00x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Heritage Insurance Holdings is 0.44x versus 0.38x for Universal Insurance Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.