WSFS Financial (WSFS) Competitors

MGIC Investment (NYSE:MTG) and WSFS Financial (NASDAQ:WSFS) are both mid-cap finance companies, but which is the superior stock? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their earnings, media sentiment, valuation, profitability, risk, analyst recommendations, dividends and institutional ownership.

Is MTG or WSFS more profitable?

MGIC Investment has a net margin of 63.49% compared to WSFS Financial's net margin of 18.86%. MGIC Investment's return on equity of 14.96% beat WSFS Financial's return on equity.

Company	Net Margins	Return on Equity	Return on Assets
MGIC Investment	63.49%	14.96%	11.80%
WSFS Financial	18.86%	10.06%	1.26%

Is MTG or WSFS a better dividend stock?

MGIC Investment pays an annual dividend of $0.52 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.8%. WSFS Financial pays an annual dividend of $0.68 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.2%. MGIC Investment pays out 17.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. WSFS Financial pays out 15.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. MGIC Investment has increased its dividend for 6 consecutive years and WSFS Financial has increased its dividend for 1 consecutive years. MGIC Investment is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Do analysts prefer MTG or WSFS?

MGIC Investment currently has a consensus price target of $26.63, indicating a potential downside of 5.57%. WSFS Financial has a consensus price target of $62.75, indicating a potential upside of 9.65%. Given WSFS Financial's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts clearly believe WSFS Financial is more favorable than MGIC Investment.

Company	Sell Ratings	Hold Ratings	Buy Ratings	Strong Buy Ratings	Rating Score
MGIC Investment	1 Sell rating(s)	5 Hold rating(s)	2 Buy rating(s)	0 Strong Buy rating(s)	2.13
WSFS Financial	0 Sell rating(s)	3 Hold rating(s)	2 Buy rating(s)	0 Strong Buy rating(s)	2.40

Does the media refer more to MTG or WSFS?

In the previous week, MGIC Investment and MGIC Investment both had 6 articles in the media. MGIC Investment's average media sentiment score of 1.33 beat WSFS Financial's score of 0.88 indicating that MGIC Investment is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Company	Very Positive	Positive	Neutral	Negative	Very Negative	Overall Sentiment
MGIC Investment	5 Very Positive mention(s)	1 Positive mention(s)	0 Neutral mention(s)	0 Negative mention(s)	0 Very Negative mention(s)	Positive
WSFS Financial	2 Very Positive mention(s)	0 Positive mention(s)	3 Neutral mention(s)	0 Negative mention(s)	0 Very Negative mention(s)	Positive

Do insiders and institutionals hold more shares of MTG or WSFS?

95.6% of MGIC Investment shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 88.5% of WSFS Financial shares are owned by institutional investors. 1.4% of MGIC Investment shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 1.2% of WSFS Financial shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Which has more volatility and risk, MTG or WSFS?

MGIC Investment has a beta of 0.89, meaning that its share price is 11% less volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, WSFS Financial has a beta of 0.87, meaning that its share price is 13% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Which has higher valuation and earnings, MTG or WSFS?

MGIC Investment has higher earnings, but lower revenue than WSFS Financial. MGIC Investment is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than WSFS Financial, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Company	Gross Revenue	Price/Sales Ratio	Net Income	Earnings Per Share	Price/Earnings Ratio
MGIC Investment	$1.21B	5.54	$762.99M	$3.01	9.37
WSFS Financial	$1.40B	2.31	$263.67M	$4.45	12.86

Summary

MGIC Investment beats WSFS Financial on 11 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.