UFCS Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Kinsale Capital Group has a net margin of 9.48% compared to United Fire Group's net margin of 26.47%. United Fire Group's return on equity of 8.23% beat Kinsale Capital Group's return on equity of 32.24%.

United Fire Group has a consensus price target of $30.00, signalling upside risk potential of 1.18%. On the other hand Kinsale Capital Group has an analysts' consensus of $474.11 which suggests that it could fall by -2.88%. Given that United Fire Group has higher upside potential than Kinsale Capital Group, analysts believe United Fire Group is more attractive than Kinsale Capital Group.

United Fire Group has a beta of 0.329, which suggesting that the stock is 67.136% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Kinsale Capital Group has a beta of 1.157, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 15.714%.

United Fire Group has a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.16%. Kinsale Capital Group offers a yield of 0.13% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.17 per share. United Fire Group pays 26.17% of its earnings as a dividend. Kinsale Capital Group pays out 3.36% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

United Fire Group quarterly revenues are $331.7M, which are smaller than Kinsale Capital Group quarterly revenues of $412.1M. United Fire Group's net income of $31.4M is lower than Kinsale Capital Group's net income of $109.1M. Notably, United Fire Group's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.46x while Kinsale Capital Group's PE ratio is 27.44x. 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 United Fire Group is 0.61x versus 7.17x for Kinsale Capital Group. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Safety Insurance Group has a net margin of 9.48% compared to United Fire Group's net margin of 2.86%. United Fire Group's return on equity of 8.23% beat Safety Insurance Group's return on equity of 8.62%.

United Fire Group has a consensus price target of $30.00, signalling upside risk potential of 1.18%. On the other hand Safety Insurance Group has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by -12.47%. Given that United Fire Group has higher upside potential than Safety Insurance Group, analysts believe United Fire Group is more attractive than Safety Insurance Group.

United Fire Group has a beta of 0.329, which suggesting that the stock is 67.136% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Safety Insurance Group has a beta of 0.188, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 81.241%.

United Fire Group has a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.16%. Safety Insurance Group offers a yield of 4.5% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.90 per share. United Fire Group pays 26.17% of its earnings as a dividend. Safety Insurance Group pays out 75.39% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

United Fire Group quarterly revenues are $331.7M, which are larger than Safety Insurance Group quarterly revenues of $284.7M. United Fire Group's net income of $31.4M is higher than Safety Insurance Group's net income of $8.1M. Notably, United Fire Group's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.46x while Safety Insurance Group's PE ratio is 16.77x. 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 United Fire Group is 0.61x versus 1.06x for Safety Insurance Group. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Universal Insurance Holdings has a net margin of 9.48% compared to United Fire Group's net margin of 1.56%. United Fire Group's return on equity of 8.23% beat Universal Insurance Holdings's return on equity of 15.73%.

United Fire Group has a consensus price target of $30.00, signalling upside risk potential of 1.18%. On the other hand Universal Insurance Holdings has an analysts' consensus of $27.00 which suggests that it could grow by 12.17%. Given that Universal Insurance Holdings has higher upside potential than United Fire Group, analysts believe Universal Insurance Holdings is more attractive than United Fire Group.

United Fire Group has a beta of 0.329, which suggesting that the stock is 67.136% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Universal Insurance Holdings has a beta of 0.757, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 24.271%.

United Fire Group has a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.16%. Universal Insurance Holdings offers a yield of 2.66% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share. United Fire Group pays 26.17% of its earnings as a dividend. Universal Insurance Holdings pays out 37.89% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

United Fire Group quarterly revenues are $331.7M, which are smaller than Universal Insurance Holdings quarterly revenues of $384.8M. United Fire Group's net income of $31.4M is higher than Universal Insurance Holdings's net income of $6M. Notably, United Fire Group's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.46x while Universal Insurance Holdings's PE ratio is 12.10x. 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 United Fire Group is 0.61x versus 0.46x for Universal Insurance Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

WR Berkley has a net margin of 9.48% compared to United Fire Group's net margin of 15.48%. United Fire Group's return on equity of 8.23% beat WR Berkley's return on equity of 22.01%.

United Fire Group has a consensus price target of $30.00, signalling upside risk potential of 1.18%. On the other hand WR Berkley has an analysts' consensus of $65.32 which suggests that it could fall by -7.02%. Given that United Fire Group has higher upside potential than WR Berkley, analysts believe United Fire Group is more attractive than WR Berkley.

United Fire Group has a beta of 0.329, which suggesting that the stock is 67.136% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison WR Berkley has a beta of 0.405, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 59.537%.

United Fire Group has a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.16%. WR Berkley offers a yield of 0.46% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.08 per share. United Fire Group pays 26.17% of its earnings as a dividend. WR Berkley pays out 30.29% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

United Fire Group quarterly revenues are $331.7M, which are smaller than WR Berkley quarterly revenues of $3.7B. United Fire Group's net income of $31.4M is lower than WR Berkley's net income of $576.1M. Notably, United Fire Group's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.46x while WR Berkley's PE ratio is 16.10x. 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 United Fire Group is 0.61x versus 2.07x for WR Berkley. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.