Assured Guaranty (AGO) Competitors

92.2% of Assured Guaranty shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 93.4% of The Hartford Insurance Group shares are owned by institutional investors. 5.7% of Assured Guaranty shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 1.3% of The Hartford Insurance Group shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Assured Guaranty has a beta of 0.76, suggesting that its share price is 24% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, The Hartford Insurance Group has a beta of 0.47, suggesting that its share price is 53% less volatile than the broader market.

Assured Guaranty has a net margin of 40.45% compared to The Hartford Insurance Group's net margin of 14.10%. The Hartford Insurance Group's return on equity of 22.52% beat Assured Guaranty's return on equity.

The Hartford Insurance Group has higher revenue and earnings than Assured Guaranty. Assured Guaranty is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than The Hartford Insurance Group, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

In the previous week, The Hartford Insurance Group had 4 more articles in the media than Assured Guaranty. MarketBeat recorded 17 mentions for The Hartford Insurance Group and 13 mentions for Assured Guaranty. Assured Guaranty's average media sentiment score of 1.28 beat The Hartford Insurance Group's score of 1.24 indicating that Assured Guaranty is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Assured Guaranty presently has a consensus target price of $92.33, suggesting a potential upside of 26.21%. The Hartford Insurance Group has a consensus target price of $149.31, suggesting a potential upside of 17.84%. Given Assured Guaranty's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Assured Guaranty is more favorable than The Hartford Insurance Group.

Assured Guaranty pays an annual dividend of $1.52 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.1%. The Hartford Insurance Group pays an annual dividend of $2.40 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.9%. Assured Guaranty pays out 17.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. The Hartford Insurance Group pays out 16.9% 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. Assured Guaranty has increased its dividend for 7 consecutive years and The Hartford Insurance Group has increased its dividend for 12 consecutive years.

Assured Guaranty pays an annual dividend of $1.52 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.1%. Loews pays an annual dividend of $0.25 per share and has a dividend yield of 0.2%. Assured Guaranty pays out 17.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Loews pays out 3.2% 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. Assured Guaranty has increased its dividend for 7 consecutive years. Assured Guaranty is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Loews has higher revenue and earnings than Assured Guaranty. Assured Guaranty is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Loews, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Assured Guaranty has a net margin of 40.45% compared to Loews' net margin of 8.83%. Loews' return on equity of 8.51% beat Assured Guaranty's return on equity.

92.2% of Assured Guaranty shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 58.3% of Loews shares are held by institutional investors. 5.7% of Assured Guaranty shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 19.0% of Loews shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Assured Guaranty currently has a consensus price target of $92.33, indicating a potential upside of 26.21%. Given Assured Guaranty's higher probable upside, equities analysts plainly believe Assured Guaranty is more favorable than Loews.

In the previous week, Assured Guaranty had 7 more articles in the media than Loews. MarketBeat recorded 13 mentions for Assured Guaranty and 6 mentions for Loews. Assured Guaranty's average media sentiment score of 1.28 beat Loews' score of 0.56 indicating that Assured Guaranty is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Assured Guaranty has a beta of 0.76, suggesting that its stock price is 24% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Loews has a beta of 0.53, suggesting that its stock price is 47% less volatile than the broader market.

Prudential Financial pays an annual dividend of $5.60 per share and has a dividend yield of 5.5%. Assured Guaranty pays an annual dividend of $1.52 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.1%. Prudential Financial pays out 57.6% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Assured Guaranty pays out 17.5% 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. Prudential Financial has increased its dividend for 2 consecutive years and Assured Guaranty has increased its dividend for 7 consecutive years.

In the previous week, Assured Guaranty had 4 more articles in the media than Prudential Financial. MarketBeat recorded 13 mentions for Assured Guaranty and 9 mentions for Prudential Financial. Assured Guaranty's average media sentiment score of 1.28 beat Prudential Financial's score of 1.12 indicating that Assured Guaranty is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Prudential Financial has higher revenue and earnings than Assured Guaranty. Assured Guaranty is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Prudential Financial, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

56.8% of Prudential Financial shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 92.2% of Assured Guaranty shares are held by institutional investors. 0.1% of Prudential Financial shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 5.7% of Assured Guaranty shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Prudential Financial has a beta of 0.86, indicating that its stock price is 14% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Assured Guaranty has a beta of 0.76, indicating that its stock price is 24% less volatile than the broader market.

Prudential Financial currently has a consensus price target of $101.50, indicating a potential upside of 0.29%. Assured Guaranty has a consensus price target of $92.33, indicating a potential upside of 26.21%. Given Assured Guaranty's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts clearly believe Assured Guaranty is more favorable than Prudential Financial.

Assured Guaranty has a net margin of 40.45% compared to Prudential Financial's net margin of 5.83%. Prudential Financial's return on equity of 16.33% beat Assured Guaranty's return on equity.

92.2% of Assured Guaranty shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 81.2% of Fidelity National Financial shares are held by institutional investors. 5.7% of Assured Guaranty shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 5.7% of Fidelity National Financial shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

In the previous week, Assured Guaranty had 8 more articles in the media than Fidelity National Financial. MarketBeat recorded 13 mentions for Assured Guaranty and 5 mentions for Fidelity National Financial. Assured Guaranty's average media sentiment score of 1.28 beat Fidelity National Financial's score of 0.87 indicating that Assured Guaranty is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Assured Guaranty has a beta of 0.76, meaning that its share price is 24% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Fidelity National Financial has a beta of 0.96, meaning that its share price is 4% less volatile than the broader market.

Assured Guaranty pays an annual dividend of $1.52 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.1%. Fidelity National Financial pays an annual dividend of $2.08 per share and has a dividend yield of 4.6%. Assured Guaranty pays out 17.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Fidelity National Financial pays out 75.9% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Assured Guaranty has raised its dividend for 7 consecutive years and Fidelity National Financial has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years.

Assured Guaranty presently has a consensus target price of $92.33, suggesting a potential upside of 26.21%. Fidelity National Financial has a consensus target price of $56.25, suggesting a potential upside of 23.49%. Given Assured Guaranty's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, research analysts clearly believe Assured Guaranty is more favorable than Fidelity National Financial.

Fidelity National Financial has higher revenue and earnings than Assured Guaranty. Assured Guaranty is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Fidelity National Financial, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Assured Guaranty has a net margin of 40.45% compared to Fidelity National Financial's net margin of 5.10%. Fidelity National Financial's return on equity of 15.49% beat Assured Guaranty's return on equity.