Public Policy (PPHC) Competitors

Public Policy (LON:PPHC) and Alpha Financial Markets Consulting (LON:AFM) are both small-cap industrials companies, but which is the better business? We will contrast the two businesses based on the strength of their profitability, analyst recommendations, community ranking, institutional ownership, risk, earnings, media sentiment, dividends and valuation.

Which has better earnings & valuation, PPHC or AFM?

Alpha Financial Markets Consulting has higher revenue and earnings than Public Policy. Public Policy is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Alpha Financial Markets Consulting, 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
Public Policy	£140.40M	1.13	-£20.83M	-£0.15	-880.00
Alpha Financial Markets Consulting	£233.62M	2.53	£15.85M	£0.13	3,876.92

Is PPHC or AFM a better dividend stock?

Public Policy pays an annual dividend of GBX 11 per share and has a dividend yield of 8.3%. Alpha Financial Markets Consulting pays an annual dividend of GBX 14 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.8%. Public Policy pays out -7,333.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Alpha Financial Markets Consulting pays out 10,769.2% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Public Policy is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

Does the media refer more to PPHC or AFM?

In the previous week, Public Policy's average media sentiment score of 0.00 equaled Alpha Financial Markets Consulting'saverage media sentiment score.

Company	Overall Sentiment
Public Policy	Neutral
Alpha Financial Markets Consulting	Neutral

Does the MarketBeat Community believe in PPHC or AFM?

Alpha Financial Markets Consulting received 69 more outperform votes than Public Policy when rated by MarketBeat users. However, 100.00% of users gave Public Policy an outperform vote while only 75.53% of users gave Alpha Financial Markets Consulting an outperform vote.

Company	Underperform	Outperform
Public Policy	Outperform Votes 2 100.00%	Underperform Votes No Votes
Alpha Financial Markets Consulting	Outperform Votes 71 75.53%	Underperform Votes 23 24.47%

Do analysts rate PPHC or AFM?

Public Policy presently has a consensus price target of GBX 250, suggesting a potential upside of 89.39%. Alpha Financial Markets Consulting has a consensus price target of GBX 442.50, suggesting a potential downside of 12.20%. Given Public Policy's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, equities research analysts clearly believe Public Policy is more favorable than Alpha Financial Markets Consulting.

Company	Sell Ratings	Hold Ratings	Buy Ratings	Strong Buy Ratings	Rating Score
Public Policy	0 Sell rating(s)	0 Hold rating(s)	1 Buy rating(s)	0 Strong Buy rating(s)	3.00
Alpha Financial Markets Consulting	0 Sell rating(s)	1 Hold rating(s)	1 Buy rating(s)	0 Strong Buy rating(s)	2.50

Do insiders & institutionals hold more shares of PPHC or AFM?

8.0% of Public Policy shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 96.8% of Alpha Financial Markets Consulting shares are owned by institutional investors. 55.3% of Public Policy shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 8.4% of Alpha Financial Markets Consulting shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, large money managers and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Is PPHC or AFM more profitable?

Alpha Financial Markets Consulting has a net margin of 6.78% compared to Public Policy's net margin of -14.84%. Alpha Financial Markets Consulting's return on equity of 10.64% beat Public Policy's return on equity.

Company	Net Margins	Return on Equity	Return on Assets
Public Policy	-14.84%	-26.09%	-1.69%
Alpha Financial Markets Consulting	6.78%	10.64%	7.51%

Summary

Alpha Financial Markets Consulting beats Public Policy on 10 of the 16 factors compared between the two stocks.