Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. MRSH
Marsh & McLennan's FY2025 fundamentals show strong top-line momentum — revenue grew 10.3% to $26.98B and free cash flow improved to $5.00B (18.5% FCF margin) — but EPS growth of just 3.1% ($8.43 vs $8.18) reveals margin compression, with net margin declining from 16.6% to 15.4% and operating margin from 23.8% to 23.1%. At $192.64, MRSH trades at a 45.1% EV/EBITDA premium and 18.1% P/E premium to peer medians, above DCF-derived intrinsic value near $187, while the MACD histogram has turned negative and smart money remains slightly negative (-0.0046 score as of 2026-06-30).
The Oliver Wyman-Anthropic Claude partnership announced on August 27 is a strategic positive, but the current valuation leaves limited upside while margin compression adds execution risk.
What could go wrong
- Margin compression persisting. Net margin declined from 16.6% in FY2024 to 15.4% in FY2025 while gross margin slipped from 42.8% to 42.3%, suggesting rising costs are eroding profitability despite double-digit revenue growth.
- Valuation premium stretched. At 23.5x P/E and 19.6x EV/EBITDA, MRSH trades at an 18.1% P/E premium and 45.1% EV/EBITDA premium to peer medians, limiting the margin of safety if growth decelerates.
- Momentum cooling at highs. MACD histogram is negative at -0.31 despite the stock trading above both its 50-day ($182.44) and 200-day ($177.80) moving averages, suggesting near-term upward momentum is fading near $192.64.
- Smart money lukewarm. Smart money score is slightly negative at -0.0046 as of 2026-06-30 with 66 funds, and has been in negative territory for most of the trailing year, indicating institutional positioning is not strongly supportive.
What would change my mind
Where this comes from: FMP FY2025 annual; derived_metrics · FMP FY2025 vs FY2024 annual; derived_metrics · derived_metrics FY2024 vs FY2025 · FMP FY2025 annual; derived_metrics. Orin's read on MRSH; not advice.
Twelve months actual closes to 2026-09-23 · actual filings
50-day average 200-day average · volume below
On file
All MRSH filingsLargest holders · 13F Q2 2026
Money flow| Filer | Position | Of fund |
|---|---|---|
| Vanguard Capital Management | $5.2B | 0.1% of fund |
| State Street | $3.7B | 0.1% of fund |
| Capital World Investors | $3.0B | 0.4% of fund |
| Wellington Management Group Llp | $2.8B | 0.5% of fund |
| Geode Capital Management | $2.3B | 0.1% of fund |
| Price T Rowe Associates /Md/ | $2.2B | 0.2% of fund |
111 filers · quarter ended Q2 2026 · positions, not flows
Insiders, last 24 months: 193 Form 4 filings, net $43.3M. Of the 50 on hand, 0 were open-market purchases and 7 sales— the rest are grants, option exercises and tax withholding.
Ask Orin about MRSH
Orin answers questions about MRSH from its filings, transcripts and numbers — with the source behind every claim. Your own desk starts with 3 free days, card required.
Start 3 free days →Where it trades
| Metric | Now | Own median | Sector |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 20.8× | 25.7× | 21.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.7× | 17.9× | — |
| P/S | 2.91× | 4.12× | — |
| P/B | 5.4× | 7.8× | — |
Its P/E sits below all 5 of the last 5 years (−2.18σ from its own mean).
4.9%
free-cash-flow growth every year for 10 years, discounted at 10%, is what today’s price implies — starting from $5.0B of trailing free cash flow. It is an assumption the market is making, not a forecast Orin is making.
What Wall Street published
$203
$182 – $234 · +19% against today's price
- 11 buy or overweight
- 22 hold
- 1 underweight or sell
The analysts’ consensus and their own ratings, not Orin’s. A target is a twelve-month opinion published by the firm that wrote it.
Against the companies it is compared to
| Company | Market cap | P/E | EV/EBITDA | Gross | Net | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRSHMarsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. | $81B | 20.8× | 17.7× | 42.4% | 14.2% | 27% |
| AJGArthur J. Gallagher & Co. | $59B | 37.6× | 15.0× | 74.6% | 10.0% | 7% |
| AONAon plc | $60B | 15.4× | 11.8× | 83.1% | 22.3% | 43% |
| BROBrown & Brown, Inc. | $21B | 17.0× | 11.4× | 59.0% | 17.6% | 10% |
| CBChubb Limited | $129B | 11.8× | 11.9× | 39.6% | 18.1% | 15% |
| ERIEErie Indemnity Company | $10B | 18.2× | 12.9× | 16.5% | 14.0% | 25% |
| NTRSNorthern Trust Corporation | $32B | 14.9× | — | 59.8% | 14.8% | 17% |
| PGRThe Progressive Corporation | $118B | 10.2× | 8.2× | 26.9% | 12.8% | 35% |
| WTWWillis Towers Watson Public Limited Company | $28B | 18.3× | 12.4× | 53.8% | 15.5% | 20% |
The median is of the 8 peers listed above and nothing else — check it against the column. This company trades 27.8% above it. The peer set is the vendor’s, so a company can appear here that a person would not have chosen.
What it has traded at
What its sector has traded at
Two scales, drawn separately on purpose: a sector median and one company’s multiple are not the same number and putting them on one axis invites a comparison neither series supports.
Discounted cash flow
| Model | Fair value | Against | Computed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard DCF | $273 | $168.17 · +62% | 2026-06-10 |
| Levered DCF | $237 | $168.17 · +41% | 2026-06-10 |
The vendor’s intrinsic-value models. Treat them as a low-growth anchor — for a fast grower the market routinely pays well above a DCF. These were computed against the price in the “against” column, not today’s.
Every estimate on one scale
The vertical rule is the current price. Ranges and point estimates are the backend’s, published as they were calculated; an arrow means the estimate sits beyond this scale, and its number is on the right.