ACT vs ESNT

For growth investors, Essent Group Ltd.

(ESNT) is the stronger pick with 12. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 4% for Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT). Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) offers the better valuation at 8. 8x trailing P/E (8. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) a "Buy" — based on 19 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, Essent Group Ltd.

(ESNT) is the cheapest at 8. 8x versus Enact Holdings, Inc. at 9. 4x. On forward P/E, Essent Group Ltd. is actually cheaper at 8. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Enact Holdings, Inc. wins at 1. 81x versus Essent Group Ltd. 's 2. 18x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Enact Holdings, Inc.

(ACT) delivered a total return of +135. 0%, compared to +25. 5% for Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ESNT returned +216. 5% versus ACT's +135. 0%. 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), Enact Holdings, Inc.

(ACT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 28β versus Essent Group Ltd. 's 0. 38β — meaning ESNT is approximately 36% more volatile than ACT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% versus 14% for Enact Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Essent Group Ltd.

(ESNT) is pulling ahead at 12. 0% versus 2. 4% for Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Essent Group Ltd. grew EPS 5. 4% year-over-year, compared to 3. 4% for Enact Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ESNT leads at 7. 2% annualised revenue growth. 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.

Essent Group Ltd.

(ESNT) is the more profitable company, earning 57. 6% net margin versus 54. 8% for Enact Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 57. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ACT leads at 69. 8% versus 67. 5% for ESNT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ESNT leads at 93. 6%, 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.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 81x versus Essent Group Ltd. 's 2. 18x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) trades at 8. 5x forward P/E versus 8. 8x for Enact Holdings, Inc. — 0. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ESNT: 15. 2% to $69. 33.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT) offers the highest yield at 1. 9%, versus 1. 8% for Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Enact Holdings, Inc.

(ACT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 28), 1. 9% yield, +135. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ACT: +135. 0%, ESNT: +216. 5%), 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.