Should Value Investors Buy Radian (RDN) Stock?
Here at Zacks, our focus is on the proven Zacks Rank system, which emphasizes earnings estimates and estimate revisions to find great stocks. Nevertheless, we are always paying attention to the latest value, growth, and momentum trends to underscore strong picks.
Of these, value investing is easily one of the most popular ways to find great stocks in any market environment. Value investors use fundamental analysis and traditional valuation metrics to find stocks that they believe are being undervalued by the market at large.
On top of the Zacks Rank, investors can also look at our innovative Style Scores system to find stocks with specific traits. For example, value investors will want to focus on the "Value" category. Stocks with high Zacks Ranks and "A" grades for Value will be some of the highest-quality value stocks on the market today.
One stock to keep an eye on is Radian (RDN). RDN is currently sporting a Zacks Rank of #2 (Buy), as well as a Value grade of A. The stock holds a P/E ratio of 7.44, while its industry has an average P/E of 8.42. Over the past year, RDN's Forward P/E has been as high as 8.48 and as low as 5.42, with a median of 7.48.
Investors should also recognize that RDN has a P/B ratio of 1.21. Investors use the P/B ratio to look at a stock's market value versus its book value, which is defined as total assets minus total liabilities. This company's current P/B looks solid when compared to its industry's average P/B of 1.44. Within the past 52 weeks, RDN's P/B has been as high as 1.38 and as low as 0.95, with a median of 1.25.
Value investors will likely look at more than just these metrics, but the above data helps show that Radian is likely undervalued currently. And when considering the strength of its earnings outlook, RDN sticks out at as one of the market's strongest value stocks.
Radian Group Inc. (RDN): Free Stock Analysis Report
To read this article on Zacks.com click here.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.