MetLife Competitors

Prudential Financial (NYSE:PRU) and MetLife (NYSE:MET) are both large-cap finance companies, but which is the superior investment? We will compare the two businesses based on the strength of their valuation, institutional ownership, analyst recommendations, profitability, earnings, dividends and risk.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a summary of current ratings and price targets for Prudential Financial and MetLife, as reported by MarketBeat.

Prudential Financial currently has a consensus price target of $91.1538, indicating a potential downside of 5.77%. MetLife has a consensus price target of $60.2308, indicating a potential downside of 2.70%. Given MetLife's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe MetLife is more favorable than Prudential Financial.

Volatility and Risk

Prudential Financial has a beta of 1.72, indicating that its stock price is 72% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, MetLife has a beta of 1.35, indicating that its stock price is 35% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Valuation & Earnings

This table compares Prudential Financial and MetLife's gross revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

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

Profitability

This table compares Prudential Financial and MetLife's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Dividends

Prudential Financial pays an annual dividend of $4.60 per share and has a dividend yield of 4.8%. MetLife pays an annual dividend of $1.84 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Prudential Financial pays out 39.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. MetLife pays out 30.1% 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 1 consecutive years and MetLife has increased its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

54.5% of Prudential Financial shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 74.4% of MetLife shares are owned by institutional investors. 0.3% of Prudential Financial shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 0.1% of MetLife shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Summary

MetLife beats Prudential Financial on 13 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

MetLife (NYSE:MET) and Aflac (NYSE:AFL) are both large-cap finance companies, but which is the better business? We will contrast the two companies based on the strength of their institutional ownership, analyst recommendations, profitability, valuation, earnings, risk and dividends.

Analyst Ratings

This is a summary of current ratings and recommmendations for MetLife and Aflac, as reported by MarketBeat.com.

MetLife currently has a consensus price target of $60.2308, indicating a potential downside of 2.70%. Aflac has a consensus price target of $48.40, indicating a potential downside of 8.58%. Given MetLife's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, equities analysts clearly believe MetLife is more favorable than Aflac.

Risk & Volatility

MetLife has a beta of 1.35, meaning that its share price is 35% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Aflac has a beta of 0.97, meaning that its share price is 3% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Earnings & Valuation

This table compares MetLife and Aflac's gross revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

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

Profitability

This table compares MetLife and Aflac's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Dividends

MetLife pays an annual dividend of $1.84 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Aflac pays an annual dividend of $1.32 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.5%. MetLife pays out 30.1% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Aflac pays out 29.7% 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. MetLife has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years and Aflac has raised its dividend for 39 consecutive years.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

74.4% of MetLife shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 66.0% of Aflac shares are held by institutional investors. 0.1% of MetLife shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 1.4% of Aflac shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Summary

MetLife beats Aflac on 10 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

MetLife (NYSE:MET) and Lincoln National (NYSE:LNC) are both large-cap finance companies, but which is the better business? We will contrast the two companies based on the strength of their institutional ownership, analyst recommendations, profitability, valuation, earnings, risk and dividends.

Risk & Volatility

MetLife has a beta of 1.35, meaning that its share price is 35% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Lincoln National has a beta of 2.26, meaning that its share price is 126% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

74.4% of MetLife shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 76.7% of Lincoln National shares are held by institutional investors. 0.1% of MetLife shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 1.5% of Lincoln National shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Analyst Ratings

This is a summary of current ratings and recommmendations for MetLife and Lincoln National, as reported by MarketBeat.com.

MetLife currently has a consensus price target of $60.2308, indicating a potential downside of 2.70%. Lincoln National has a consensus price target of $58.3846, indicating a potential downside of 6.19%. Given MetLife's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, equities analysts clearly believe MetLife is more favorable than Lincoln National.

Dividends

MetLife pays an annual dividend of $1.84 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Lincoln National pays an annual dividend of $1.68 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.7%. MetLife pays out 30.1% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Lincoln National pays out 19.3% 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. MetLife has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years and Lincoln National has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years. MetLife is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Earnings & Valuation

This table compares MetLife and Lincoln National's gross revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

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

Profitability

This table compares MetLife and Lincoln National's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Summary

MetLife beats Lincoln National on 11 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

MetLife (NYSE:MET) and Primerica (NYSE:PRI) are both finance companies, but which is the superior business? We will contrast the two businesses based on the strength of their valuation, institutional ownership, analyst recommendations, dividends, profitability, risk and earnings.

Profitability

This table compares MetLife and Primerica's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Earnings and Valuation

This table compares MetLife and Primerica's revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

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

Volatility & Risk

MetLife has a beta of 1.35, suggesting that its stock price is 35% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Primerica has a beta of 1.44, suggesting that its stock price is 44% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Dividends

MetLife pays an annual dividend of $1.84 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Primerica pays an annual dividend of $1.88 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.2%. MetLife pays out 30.1% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Primerica pays out 22.3% 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. MetLife has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years and Primerica has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years. MetLife is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a summary of current recommendations for MetLife and Primerica, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

MetLife presently has a consensus price target of $60.2308, indicating a potential downside of 2.70%. Primerica has a consensus price target of $164.1667, indicating a potential upside of 4.10%. Given Primerica's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts clearly believe Primerica is more favorable than MetLife.

Insider and Institutional Ownership

74.4% of MetLife shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 89.0% of Primerica shares are held by institutional investors. 0.1% of MetLife shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 0.9% of Primerica shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Summary

Primerica beats MetLife on 12 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

MetLife (NYSE:MET) and Unum Group (NYSE:UNM) are both finance companies, but which is the better investment? We will contrast the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, valuation, institutional ownership, analyst recommendations, earnings, risk and dividends.

Dividends

MetLife pays an annual dividend of $1.84 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Unum Group pays an annual dividend of $1.14 per share and has a dividend yield of 4.0%. MetLife pays out 30.1% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Unum Group pays out 21.0% 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. MetLife has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years and Unum Group has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years. Unum Group is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a breakdown of recent recommendations and price targets for MetLife and Unum Group, as provided by MarketBeat.

MetLife currently has a consensus price target of $60.2308, indicating a potential downside of 2.70%. Unum Group has a consensus price target of $25.75, indicating a potential downside of 8.95%. Given MetLife's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, research analysts clearly believe MetLife is more favorable than Unum Group.

Risk & Volatility

MetLife has a beta of 1.35, suggesting that its share price is 35% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Unum Group has a beta of 1.78, suggesting that its share price is 78% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Profitability

This table compares MetLife and Unum Group's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Valuation and Earnings

This table compares MetLife and Unum Group's revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

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

Insider and Institutional Ownership

74.4% of MetLife shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 85.0% of Unum Group shares are held by institutional investors. 0.1% of MetLife shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 0.5% of Unum Group shares are held by company 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.

Summary

MetLife beats Unum Group on 10 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

CNO Financial Group (NYSE:CNO) and MetLife (NYSE:MET) are both finance companies, but which is the superior investment? We will contrast the two businesses based on the strength of their institutional ownership, analyst recommendations, earnings, valuation, risk, profitability and dividends.

Profitability

This table compares CNO Financial Group and MetLife's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Volatility & Risk

CNO Financial Group has a beta of 1.41, indicating that its stock price is 41% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, MetLife has a beta of 1.35, indicating that its stock price is 35% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Dividends

CNO Financial Group pays an annual dividend of $0.48 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.9%. MetLife pays an annual dividend of $1.84 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. CNO Financial Group pays out 26.7% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. MetLife pays out 30.1% 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. CNO Financial Group has raised its dividend for 6 consecutive years and MetLife has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

Insider and Institutional Ownership

98.1% of CNO Financial Group shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 74.4% of MetLife shares are owned by institutional investors. 2.0% of CNO Financial Group shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 0.1% of MetLife shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, large money managers and endowments believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Earnings and Valuation

This table compares CNO Financial Group and MetLife's top-line revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

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

Analyst Ratings

This is a breakdown of recent ratings and target prices for CNO Financial Group and MetLife, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

CNO Financial Group presently has a consensus price target of $25.20, indicating a potential upside of 0.28%. MetLife has a consensus price target of $60.2308, indicating a potential downside of 2.70%. Given CNO Financial Group's higher probable upside, equities analysts plainly believe CNO Financial Group is more favorable than MetLife.

Summary

CNO Financial Group beats MetLife on 9 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.