GSHD Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

eHealth has a net margin of 3.1% compared to Goosehead Insurance's net margin of 30.93%. Goosehead Insurance's return on equity of 228.38% beat eHealth's return on equity of 1.6%.

Goosehead Insurance has a consensus price target of $116.11, signalling upside risk potential of 13.41%. On the other hand eHealth has an analysts' consensus of $10.63 which suggests that it could grow by 104.72%. Given that eHealth has higher upside potential than Goosehead Insurance, analysts believe eHealth is more attractive than Goosehead Insurance.

Goosehead Insurance has a beta of 1.449, which suggesting that the stock is 44.901% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison eHealth has a beta of 1.113, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 11.29%.

Goosehead Insurance has a quarterly dividend of $5.91 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. eHealth offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Goosehead Insurance pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. eHealth pays out 55.3% of its earnings as a dividend. eHealth's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Goosehead Insurance quarterly revenues are $75.6M, which are smaller than eHealth quarterly revenues of $315.2M. Goosehead Insurance's net income of $2.3M is lower than eHealth's net income of $97.5M. Notably, Goosehead Insurance's price-to-earnings ratio is 86.03x while eHealth's PE ratio is --. 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 Goosehead Insurance is 11.03x versus 0.29x for eHealth. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Kingstone Companies has a net margin of 3.1% compared to Goosehead Insurance's net margin of 12.92%. Goosehead Insurance's return on equity of 228.38% beat Kingstone Companies's return on equity of 38.66%.

Goosehead Insurance has a consensus price target of $116.11, signalling upside risk potential of 13.41%. On the other hand Kingstone Companies has an analysts' consensus of $19.00 which suggests that it could grow by 6.32%. Given that Goosehead Insurance has higher upside potential than Kingstone Companies, analysts believe Goosehead Insurance is more attractive than Kingstone Companies.

Goosehead Insurance has a beta of 1.449, which suggesting that the stock is 44.901% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Kingstone Companies has a beta of 0.605, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 39.519%.

Goosehead Insurance has a quarterly dividend of $5.91 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Kingstone Companies offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Goosehead Insurance pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Kingstone Companies pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Goosehead Insurance quarterly revenues are $75.6M, which are larger than Kingstone Companies quarterly revenues of $42.1M. Goosehead Insurance's net income of $2.3M is lower than Kingstone Companies's net income of $5.4M. Notably, Goosehead Insurance's price-to-earnings ratio is 86.03x while Kingstone Companies's PE ratio is 12.41x. 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 Goosehead Insurance is 11.03x versus 1.42x for Kingstone Companies. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Marsh & McLennan Companies has a net margin of 3.1% compared to Goosehead Insurance's net margin of 19.56%. Goosehead Insurance's return on equity of 228.38% beat Marsh & McLennan Companies's return on equity of 29.77%.

Goosehead Insurance has a consensus price target of $116.11, signalling upside risk potential of 13.41%. On the other hand Marsh & McLennan Companies has an analysts' consensus of $233.06 which suggests that it could grow by 2.54%. Given that Goosehead Insurance has higher upside potential than Marsh & McLennan Companies, analysts believe Goosehead Insurance is more attractive than Marsh & McLennan Companies.

Goosehead Insurance has a beta of 1.449, which suggesting that the stock is 44.901% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Marsh & McLennan Companies has a beta of 0.847, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 15.285%.

Goosehead Insurance has a quarterly dividend of $5.91 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Marsh & McLennan Companies offers a yield of 1.43% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.82 per share. Goosehead Insurance pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Marsh & McLennan Companies pays out 37.27% of its earnings as a dividend. Marsh & McLennan Companies's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Goosehead Insurance quarterly revenues are $75.6M, which are smaller than Marsh & McLennan Companies quarterly revenues of $7.1B. Goosehead Insurance's net income of $2.3M is lower than Marsh & McLennan Companies's net income of $1.4B. Notably, Goosehead Insurance's price-to-earnings ratio is 86.03x while Marsh & McLennan Companies's PE ratio is 27.85x. 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 Goosehead Insurance is 11.03x versus 4.50x for Marsh & McLennan Companies. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Reliance Global Group has a net margin of 3.1% compared to Goosehead Insurance's net margin of -42.41%. Goosehead Insurance's return on equity of 228.38% beat Reliance Global Group's return on equity of -254.59%.

Goosehead Insurance has a consensus price target of $116.11, signalling upside risk potential of 13.41%. On the other hand Reliance Global Group has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 10817.44%. Given that Reliance Global Group has higher upside potential than Goosehead Insurance, analysts believe Reliance Global Group is more attractive than Goosehead Insurance.

Goosehead Insurance has a beta of 1.449, which suggesting that the stock is 44.901% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Reliance Global Group has a beta of -0.609, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 160.923%.

Goosehead Insurance has a quarterly dividend of $5.91 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Reliance Global Group offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Goosehead Insurance pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Reliance Global Group pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Goosehead Insurance quarterly revenues are $75.6M, which are larger than Reliance Global Group quarterly revenues of $3.3M. Goosehead Insurance's net income of $2.3M is higher than Reliance Global Group's net income of -$1.4M. Notably, Goosehead Insurance's price-to-earnings ratio is 86.03x while Reliance Global Group's PE ratio is --. 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 Goosehead Insurance is 11.03x versus 0.09x for Reliance Global Group. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.