FG vs PFG

For growth investors, F&G Annuities & Life, Inc.

(FG) is the stronger pick with 5. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for Principal Financial Group, Inc. (PFG). F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. (FG) offers the better valuation at 15. 7x trailing P/E (7. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. (FG) a "Hold" — based on 9 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, F&G Annuities & Life, Inc.

(FG) is the cheapest at 15. 7x versus Principal Financial Group, Inc. at 19. 3x. On forward P/E, F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 2x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus Principal Financial Group, Inc. 's 13. 99x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, F&G Annuities & Life, Inc.

(FG) delivered a total return of +92. 7%, compared to +73. 2% for Principal Financial Group, Inc. (PFG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PFG returned +197. 4% versus FG's +92. 7%. 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), Principal Financial Group, Inc.

(PFG) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 00β versus F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. 's 1. 02β — meaning FG is approximately 2% more volatile than PFG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Principal Financial Group, Inc. (PFG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 34% versus 45% for F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), F&G Annuities & Life, Inc.

(FG) is pulling ahead at 5. 7% versus -3. 1% for Principal Financial Group, Inc. (PFG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Principal Financial Group, Inc. grew EPS -21. 4% year-over-year, compared to -61. 5% for F&G Annuities & Life, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FG leads at 36. 8% 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.

Principal Financial Group, Inc.

(PFG) is the more profitable company, earning 7. 6% net margin versus 4. 6% for F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. — meaning it keeps 7. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PFG leads at 9. 1% versus 5. 6% for FG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PFG leads at 45. 2%, 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, F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. (FG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Principal Financial Group, Inc. 's 13. 99x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. (FG) trades at 7. 2x forward P/E versus 10. 9x for Principal Financial Group, Inc. — 3. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FG: 5. 2% to $31. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

F&G Annuities & Life, Inc. (FG) offers the highest yield at 3. 5%, versus 3. 0% for Principal Financial Group, Inc. (PFG).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Principal Financial Group, Inc.

(PFG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 00), 3. 0% yield, +197. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PFG: +197. 4%, FG: +92. 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.

In terms of investment character: FG is a small-cap deep-value stock; PFG is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. 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.