AAMI vs AMG

For growth investors, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.

(AMG) is the stronger pick with 19. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 17. 5% for Acadian Asset Management (AAMI). Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. (AMG) offers the better valuation at 15. 6x trailing P/E (10. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. (AMG) a "Buy" — based on 12 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.

(AMG) is the cheapest at 15. 6x versus Acadian Asset Management at 35. 5x. On forward P/E, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 1x.

Over the past 5 years, Acadian Asset Management (AAMI) delivered a total return of +253.

9%, compared to +120. 9% for Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. (AMG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AAMI returned +471. 7% versus AMG's +128. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.

(AMG) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 09β versus Acadian Asset Management's 1. 52β — meaning AAMI is approximately 39% more volatile than AMG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. (AMG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 61% versus 4% for Acadian Asset Management — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.

(AMG) is pulling ahead at 19. 8% versus 17. 5% for Acadian Asset Management (AAMI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. grew EPS 50. 3% year-over-year, compared to -0. 5% for Acadian Asset Management. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.

(AMG) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 3% net margin versus 13. 5% for Acadian Asset Management — meaning it keeps 29. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AMG leads at 31. 8% versus 27. 4% for AAMI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AAMI leads at 92. 9%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

On forward earnings alone, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.

(AMG) trades at 10. 1x forward P/E versus 16. 4x for Acadian Asset Management — 6. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AMG: 13. 5% to $402. 50.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.

(AMG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 09), +128. 3% 10Y return). Acadian Asset Management (AAMI) carries a higher beta of 1. 52 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (AMG: +128. 3%, AAMI: +471. 7%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.