Is Everest Group Stock Underperforming the Dow?
With a market cap of $14.2 billion, Everest Group, Ltd. (EG) is a global provider of reinsurance and insurance solutions through its Insurance and Reinsurance segments. The company offers a broad range of property and casualty products, including treaty and facultative reinsurance, as well as specialty lines such as catastrophe, marine, aviation, and mortgage reinsurance.
Companies worth more than $10 billion are generally labeled as 'large-cap' stocks and Everest Group fits this criterion perfectly. The company operates across the United States, Europe, and internationally, serving clients through brokers and direct channels.
3 ETFs with Dividend Yields of 12% or Higher for Your Income Portfolio
Warren Buffett Famously Warned to 'Make Money While You Sleep' or 'You Will Work Until You Die': 5 Stocks To Invest Like Buffett
Unusually Active Put Options Signal Long Straddle Opportunity After Zoetis Downgrade
Stop Missing Market Moves: Get the FREE Barchart Brief – your midday dose of stock movers, trending sectors, and actionable trade ideas, delivered right to your inbox. Sign Up Now!
Shares of the Hamilton, Bermuda-based company have declined 18.3% from its 52-week high of $407.30. Over the past three months, its shares have decreased 7.4%, underperforming the broader Dow Jones Industrials Average's ($DOWI) 1.4% rise during the same period.
Longer term, EG stock is down 8.2% on a YTD basis, a steeper drop than DOWI's marginal decline. Moreover, shares of Everest Group have dipped 11.8% over the past 52 weeks, compared to DOWI's 8.6% increase over the same time frame.
Despite a few fluctuations, the stock has been trading below its 50-day and 200-day moving averages since late October last year.
Shares of Everest Group tumbled nearly 6% following its Q1 2025 results on Apr. 30 due to a steep 71% drop in net income to $210 million ($4.90 per share). The company posted a significant pre-tax catastrophe loss of $472 million, primarily due to California wildfires, which contributed to a deteriorated combined ratio of 102.7%. Both adjusted EPS of $6.45 and revenue of $4.3 billion missed Wall Street expectations.
EG stock has performed weaker than its rival, SiriusPoint Ltd. (SPNT). SPNT stock has returned 17.9% YTD and 53.6% over the past 52 weeks.
Despite the stock's underperformance, analysts remain moderately optimistic about its prospects. The stock has a consensus rating of 'Moderate Buy' from 13 analysts in coverage, and as of writing, EG is trading below the mean price target of $391.75.
On the date of publication, Sohini Mondal did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Barchart.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
18 minutes ago
- Forbes
IndyCar Announces New Car For 2028 Season With Testing In Early 2026
Will Power, Team Penske Chevrolet prior to the NTT IndyCar Series XPEL Grand Prix at Road America on ... More June 21, 2025 in Elkhart Lake, Wisconsin. (Photo by Michael L. Levitt/Lumen via Getty Images) IndyCar announced on Saturday, June 21 that a new car will be introduced to the series in 2028 and it will be ready for testing in early 2026. The information was also shared with team owners Saturday at Road America, site of Sunday's XPEL Grand Prix at Road America. Extensive planning and collaborative design work continues for the new chassis, with thorough on-track testing scheduled for early 2026. Dallara Continues As Chassis Builder Dallara will produce the chassis, which will feature a look designed to appeal to a new generation of fans while keeping styling cues recognized by all as an IndyCar Series car. Dallara has produced chassis for the series since 1997 and has been the series' exclusive chassis supplier since 2008. 'The time has come for a new NTT IndyCar Series chassis," IndyCar President J. Douglas Boles said. 'The DW12 served the series so well, as it provided a combination of phenomenal, wheel-to-wheel racing and critical enhancements to safety. But recent significant updates to the car – from the aeroscreen to the hybrid power unit – have helped advance the need for a completely new car. 'We are pleased by what our engineers and Dallara have collaboratively designed and believe it will appeal to the fans and paddock while also upholding our standards of safety and enhancing IndyCar's on-track competition well into the future.' Three areas – competition, powertrain development and safety – are pillars of the engineering, design and development of the new car. The new car will enhance the ultra-competitive nature of the NTT IndyCar Series by being even better suited for racing on all four types of circuits the series visits – superspeedways, short ovals, street circuits and permanent road courses. Evolution of the new chassis has included work by Dallara and recently developed simulation technology, aimed at enhancing overall raceability. Working in tandem with Dallara and other component suppliers, the overall car design includes a projected weight reduction of 85-100 pounds compared to the current IndyCar Series chassis. Plans also include a move to a 2.4-liter twin-turbocharged V-6 internal combustion engine, which is expected to provide more torque and power over the current engine formula. Xtrac, an exclusive supplier for IndyCar since 2000, will continue to provide transmissions for the new chassis. Development for 2028 includes a gearbox that will shed 25 pounds from the currently used unit and one that will share components with a future INDY NXT by Firestone gearbox – streamlining components for teams also involved in IndyCar's development series. Low-voltage hybrid engine technology, introduced to series competition with a successful launch in July 2024, will continue to evolve in the new car with longer deployment, more horsepower gain and overall improved performance. Performance Friction Corporation (PFC) once again will be the exclusive supplier of brake system components for the series, as it has since 2017. Safety also will continue to be a focus of Dallara's design, in close collaboration with IndyCar technical and medical response officials. The new car will bolster safety to new benchmarks with an ergonomic driver cockpit to improve seating position, an integrated aeroscreen and a new roll hoop. The existing chassis was retrofitted with the aeroscreen upon that revolutionary safety device's introduction in 2020. Renderings and more information about the new car, along with additional partners, will be announced at a later date. This new car update and plan continues the upward trajectory of North America's premier open-wheel series. Recent milestones include FOX viewership results of a 27 percent year-over-year gain while averaging 2 million viewers for the 2025 season, a partnership renewal with longtime tire supplier Firestone, the announcement of the IndyCar Grand Prix of Arlington in partnership with the Dallas Cowboys, Texas Rangers and city of Arlington, Texas, starting in 2026 and the acquisition of the Acura Grand Prix of Long Beach by Penske Entertainment.
Forbes
18 minutes ago
- Forbes
The New Ethos: Where Gamesmanship Ends And Character Begins
Houston, TX, USA - February 8, 2015: Monopoly Board Game - car on Park Place with hotel Success stories are told in the language of domination—of markets, rivals, and time. But stories of grit and perseverance turn out to be half-baked. After decades of worshipping at the altar of productivity and winning at all costs, a new ethos is emerging that elevates character alongside competence for competitive advantage. The new ethos embraces a more complete view of character and challenges its misconceptions. For example, it challenges the myth that people with character operate with 'one hand tied behind their back,' or that character can't be developed, as Bill Furlong, Rob Austin, and I explain in our MIT Sloan article 'Make Leader Character Your Edge.' The new ethos requires a shift from treating business as a game to be played, based on competence alone, to one that relies on character as the foundation for competitive advantage, as captured in Table 1. Table 1 - Old Versus New Ethos The Toxic Side of the Game The metaphor of business as a game—complete with winners, losers, scoreboards, and trophies—has shaped everything from how leaders manage teams to how decisions are made in the boardroom. However, this mindset can easily spiral into toxicity. FEATURED | Frase ByForbes™ Unscramble The Anagram To Reveal The Phrase Pinpoint By Linkedin Guess The Category Queens By Linkedin Crown Each Region Crossclimb By Linkedin Unlock A Trivia Ladder When success is measured only by profits and quarterly performance, wins and losses, bad behavior is often excused, even celebrated. The casualties of a 'win-at-any-cost' mentality are well documented, from financial fraud to toxic work cultures. Think of the implosions at Enron, Theranos, or, more recently, FTX. These weren't just failures in strategy—they were failures of character, as my colleagues and I documented in our 'Leadership on Trial' research, which examined the failures of leadership revealed in the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. Treating business as a game based on competence alone created a gravitational pull that has been difficult to shift. Individual mindsets, organizational priorities and practices, and broader regulation and oversight systems have become hard-wired around it, and even justify the game. We are all complicit. When we treat what we do as a game, we justify actions as 'just part of the game', 'it's business, it's not personal,' and we become desensitized to the harm. Shifting the gravitational pull of the current system starts with an undeniable logic that will motivate and shape the transformation. The undeniable logic is that the competence-oriented gamification of business and society, relying on a cost-benefit consequentialist rationale, is failing virtually every measure. Short-termism has fueled crises like the 2008 financial collapse and scandals at Enron and Boeing, where near-term gain outweighed safety or transparency. Meanwhile, workplace burnout and mental health declines reflect how human well-being is often sacrificed for productivity, as revealed in Gallup polls and OECD reports. Environmental degradation, driven by externalizing ecological costs, is documented in IPCC reports, while the UN draws attention to income inequality that threatens economic growth and democracy. Philosophers like Michael Sandel (author of Democracy's Discontent and What Money Can't Buy) argue that market-driven reasoning undermines moral and civic values, advocating for frameworks prioritizing justice, dignity, and capability over sheer utility. Alternative approaches are imperative, with trust in capitalism eroding as revealed by the Edelman Trust Barometer. A New Ethos Based on Character To shift the gravitational pull from the consequentialist cost-benefit paradigm requires a new foundation that defines and measures success differently. Rather than relying on the logic of cost-benefit analysis to determine the merits of decisions and actions, a virtue ethics paradigm has us examining who we are first. As Forbes writer Jonathan Westover describes in his article 'Approaches to Organizational and Leadership Ethics In a Complex World,' virtue ethics focuses on the person's character, meaning that the test of sound judgment is not one anchored in costs and benefits alone, but rather a test of character. Character, anchored in virtue ethics, is one of the most ancient areas of study, dating back to Confucius, Aristotle, and Plato. There has been significant efforts in recent years including the works of Alasdair MacIntyre in 'After Virtue,' Fred Kiel, in 'Return on Character,' Martin Seligman and Christopher Peterson's research volume 'Character Strengths and Virtues,' David Brooks in 'The Road to Character,' General James Anderson and Dave Anderson's book 'Becoming a Leader of Character,' 'Cultivating Virtue in the University' by Michael Lamb, Jonathan Brant and Edward Brooks, and my books 'Developing Leadership Character' with Gerard Seijts and Jeffrey Gandz, and 'The Character Compass' with Gerard Seijts and Bill Furlong. General Stanley McChrystal's recent book, 'On Character: Choices That Define a Life,' has received considerable press. While these books have given character profile and helped people see its value, most people believe they have character covered by having 'good values.' So, what does character look like in a corporate context? It's not a glossy mission statement or a set of aspirational values. The hard work of developing character underpins the realization of aspirational values, which manifests as courage in the face of hard decisions. It's humility when leaders admit mistakes, empathy in how employees are treated, and accountability when things go wrong. Patagonia has modeled this ethos for years. Its environmental activism isn't marketing—it's identity, as Forbes contributor Doug Sundheim describes: 'Much of its success can be traced back to Chouinard's uncompromising leadership since Day One. Whereas many companies espouse a set of values only to sacrifice them under the pressure of quarterly returns, Patagonia has religiously stuck to theirs for the last half century, come what may. Quality, integrity, sustainability, and justice were never negotiable.' Unfortunately, too many people focus on the values of Patagonia, whereas the basis of the competitive advantage arises from the character of the leaders and their capacity to infuse that strength of character in others. Character is not subjective. In 'Cracking the Code: Leader Character Development for Competitive Advantage,' Corey Crossan, Bill Furlong, and I put to rest misconceptions about character. We clearly articulate what it is, how it can be assessed and developed, and how it can be embedded in an organization. In my Forbes article 'From Good to Great: 10 Ways to Elevate Your Character Quotient,' we offer 10 questions that provide a strategic assessment of what it takes to embrace character leadership fully. These foundational approaches underpin seeing and embracing character as a new ethos. A high character quotient gives individuals confidence that they know what needs to be done to embrace character as a new imperative. A low quotient suggests gaps that reveal significant blind spots. If you do not understand how imbalances of character compromise judgment, and you cannot observe and identify character imbalances in yourself or others, it is easy to fall into the trap of using cost-benefit analysis to evaluate success. You tend to overlook the dysfunctional behaviors of leaders with imbalanced character, focusing only on either selective results or some justification of their actions. A tell-tale sign is when we dismiss someone's arrogance, disrespect, and abusive behavior because we fail to see and understand that these behaviors are evidence of character imbalances that will inevitably compromise judgment. Shifting the Gravitation Pull Starts with Us Part of shifting the gravitational pull to character resides in our capacity to diagnose the strength of character in ourselves and others, identify the imbalances that compromise judgment, and actively work to mitigate them. In our workshops, once people are exposed to the leader character framework with its 11 dimensions and 62 supporting behaviors, they can start to observe and identify strengths and weaknesses in the character of others. They begin to see that the imbalance in character dimensions, such as the high drive, courage, and transcendence of Steve Jobs, coupled with low temperance and humility, compromises judgment. With that understanding, they are better equipped to move beyond a superficial assessment of leadership based on results, to one that can diagnose the strength of character that underpins judgment. There are often three profound moments in our workshops. The first is when people begin to see that character reveals itself in micro-moments and decision-making episodes, not just a general account of whether someone was successful. The second is when they grasp that observable behaviors such as being disrespectful, condescending, and arrogant are the manifestations of character imbalances that compromise judgment. Often, these were deemed a matter of style or personality. With the lens of character they are seen as the bell-weather of compromised judgment, not only in the leader who disregards insight from others, but in how the leader fosters a toxic culture that undermines judgment more broadly. The third moment is when they come to grips with the understanding that a person would never weaken a strength like courage or drive, but instead character development focuses on strengthening weakness like temperance and humility, as in the case of Jobs, to ensure strengths don't manifest as excess vices. Strengthening humility does not need to sacrifice courage. Also, unlike personality, which is a set of semi-stable traits, character can be developed, providing a great deal of inspiration and aspiration, particularly because it benefits well-being and sustained excellence, both personally and professionally. One of the tricky aspects of character is that it is easier to identify imbalances in others than in ourselves. We tend to judge ourselves on our good intentions and others on their behaviors, and suffer from a chronic over-estimation of our self-awareness. Tasha Eurich's research reveals that 85% of people believe they are self-aware, while only 10% are. To close the gap, there are assessments such as the Leader Character Insight Assessment offered through Sigma Assessment Systems and the VIA Character Strengths survey offered through VIA. In terms of developing character, Corey Crossan and I created the Virtuosity mobile app to embed the science of character and the science of habit development in technology that guides individual character development. The famous 1970 cartoon by Walt Kelly, portraying that 'we have met the enemy, and it is us,' is spot-on for character. Until we understand character, identify imbalances in ourselves and others, and actively work on developing character, we will continue to misdiagnose the factors that compromise judgment, leading to the many ills facing individuals, organizations, and society. Strengthening the individual foundations of character is necessary but insufficient, as there is a need for course correction in the broader systems embodying old ways of thinking. Cultivating Character in Organizations and Oversight If character is the new ethos, cultivating it must go beyond surface-level virtue signaling. It must be systematically and sincerely embedded into the organization's DNA. As Forbes contributor Glenn Llopis writes, 'A leader's character is what earns the right to lead others.' It's not charisma or cleverness—it's the moral gravity that holds an enterprise together. Pam Boney, a contributor to the Forbes Coaches Council, put it bluntly: 'Before a company can realize any objectives, it needs a supportive culture—and that culture must be grounded in character.' In my recent Forbes article 'Seeing How Character Eats Culture For Breakfast,' based on collaborations with Corey Crossan and Bill Furlong, I offer a practical approach to helping organizations understand how culture reflects the character of its members. This practical and revolutionary approach helps individuals and organizations see that the culture they seek is anchored in character, yet the culture they often experience reflects the imbalances of character of its members, particularly leaders. The remedy is to start with leader character development to transform the organizational culture. From the vantage point of actively developing character, it is easy to see how policies and practices often work against character and reinforce old and outdated mindsets. For example, in an MIT Sloan Management Review article, 'Make Character Count in Hiring and Promoting,' I describe that we tend to hire on competence and fire people because of character. Human Resource practices such as recruiting, hiring, performance management, promotion, and succession management need to shift the gravitational pull to elevate character alongside competence. Simply put, wherever competence resides, character belongs. Another key leverage point for shifting the ethos is oversight, whether that be by Boards of Directors, Trade Associations, or regulators. The same prescriptions exist. Members need to develop their character; from that vantage point, they can see ways to help shift the ethos. For example, boards of directors are responsible for selecting CEOs but have often neglected implementing an evidence-based approach to assess character. Few would understand how to assess the quality of judgment and decision-making of the organization based on character. Although regulators continue to struggle with misconduct in organizations, few have turned to character to influence change. Notable exceptions are the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in the U.K., one of the first regulators to pick up on our 'Leadership on Trial' research and share it with their constituents. Also, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OFSI) in Canada noted in a January 31, 2024, guideline that integrity is achieved by 'ensuring people are of good character.' Character in an AI World While AI and automation evolve, companies shaping the future will be led by humans whose character-based judgment will become even more important. In my recent Forbes article on 'Why Artificial Intelligence Needs Character-Based Leadership,' I make the case for how character-based judgment harnesses the power of AI. There is no replacement for character. Business is not a game. It is time for a new ethos with character as the foundation.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Watchdog finds ‘rampant abuse' of remote work among federal employees during Biden administration
A U.S. government watchdog found 'rampant abuse' of work-from-home policies by federal workers, according to a new report released on Friday. The Inspector General of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which oversees the federal workforce, found 'compliance failures and weak internal oversight' as the root cause of the problem. The report focused on procedures that allowed employees to work remotely, rather than whether they were effectively performing their jobs. The report sampled badging data, timesheet, and remote-work agreements of dozens of federal employees in 2024, during President Joe Biden's administration, following a 2023 request from Republican Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa, who took issue with telework policies. 'Under the previous administration, OPMʼs telework and remote work policies were mismanaged and oversight was virtually nonexistent,' OPM Acting Director Chuck Ezell said in a statement. 'That era of telework abuse is over,' Ezell declared. 'At President Trumpʼs direction, OPM has restored in-person operations to ensure federal employees are working for the taxpayers.' On the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies and departments to 'take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements' and require employees to return to the office on a full-time basis. Federal employees were required to return on March 3; therefore, the findings and recommendations of the OPM report, which aimed to develop written procedures detailing internal controls concerning remote work, are now considered closed, according to the executive summary. OPM is the chief human resources agency and personnel policy manager for the federal government's 2.8 million employees. President Trump has claimed that many federal workers took on second jobs while still being paid by the federal government, or were not fulfilling their duties when working remotely. There was a dramatic increase in working from home during the Covid-19 pandemic in the first Trump administration. Based on a small sample of timesheets, the report found that 58.1 percent of the sampled employees failed to meet the minimum requirements for in-office work in 2024. According to OPM's inspector general, three in ten (29.7%) telework agreements had lapsed, 21 percent of those sampled had discrepancies in their paperwork, and 15 percent did not have any approved agreements on file. The report did not investigate why this was the case, but suggested that possible reasons included 'weak or missing management controls,' 'negligence or carelessness,' and 'intentional fraud or abuse.' Under the order signed by President Trump mandating a return to in-office work, limited exemptions are allowed as determined by departmental heads. Similarly, new internal controls and compliance reviews have been set for employees who continue to telework. When workers were summoned back into their offices five days per week in March, many were met with less-than-desirable conditions, from cramped workspaces to dirty bathrooms. In addition to the return to the office, the Trump administration also sought to cut costs by reducing space and staff. Multiple federal employees across various agencies and departments told news outlets at the time that they found themselves working elbow-to-elbow as staff consolidated into smaller workspaces. Understaffed cleaning crews are reportedly struggling to keep up with the demand for tidy spaces, resulting in dirty bathrooms with no paper towels. Some staff were asked to bring their own toilet paper or help out by taking their trash home, a federal employee told USA Today.
