Asset Management
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
JHG vs IVZ vs AMG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Asset Management
JHG vs IVZ vs AMG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $7.72B | $12.15B | $8.17B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.10B | $6.38B | $2.45B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $798M | $-243M | $717M |
| Gross Margin | 71.8% | 43.2% | 86.0% |
| Operating Margin | 31.5% | -10.9% | 31.8% |
| Forward P/E | 12.0x | 10.6x | 9.2x |
| Total Debt | $396M | $10.12B | $2.69B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.25B | $1.98B | $586M |
JHG vs IVZ vs AMG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Janus Henderson Gro… (JHG) | 100 | 239.8 | +139.8% |
| Invesco Ltd. (IVZ) | 100 | 343.2 | +243.2% |
| Affiliated Managers… (AMG) | 100 | 459.4 | +359.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: JHG vs IVZ vs AMG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
JHG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 25.2%, EPS growth 104.3%
- 197.0% 10Y total return vs AMG's 89.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.92, Low D/E 6.5%, current ratio 53.82x
IVZ is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 1.67, yield 3.0%
- 3.0% yield; 4-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend
- +98.8% vs JHG's +51.0%
AMG is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.23 vs JHG's 0.24
- Lower P/E (9.2x vs 12.0x), PEG 0.23 vs 0.24
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 25.2% NII/revenue growth vs IVZ's 5.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.2x vs 12.0x), PEG 0.23 vs 0.24 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs AMG's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.92 vs IVZ's 1.67, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.0% yield; 4-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +98.8% vs JHG's +51.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs AMG's 0.5% |
JHG vs IVZ vs AMG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
JHG vs IVZ vs AMG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMG leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IVZ is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.4B annually — 2.6x AMG's $2.4B. AMG is the more profitable business, keeping 29.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IVZ's -4.4%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.1B | $6.4B | $2.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.0B | $1.2B | $855M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $798M | -$243M | $717M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $390M | $1.9B | $978M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +71.8% | +43.2% | +86.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +31.5% | -10.9% | +31.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +25.8% | -4.4% | +29.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +22.6% | +41.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.4% | +34.2% | +149.1% |
Valuation Metrics
IVZ leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.9x trailing earnings, JHG trades at a 27% valuation discount to AMG's 13.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JHG offers better value at 0.20x vs AMG's 0.34x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $7.7B | $12.2B | $8.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.9B | $20.3B | $10.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 9.89x | -17.09x | 13.46x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.03x | 10.64x | 9.23x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.20x | — | 0.34x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.78x | 16.53x | 10.84x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.49x | 1.91x | 3.34x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.29x | 0.95x | 2.28x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 8.43x | 8.13x |
Profitability & Efficiency
JHG leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AMG delivers a 16.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $-2 for IVZ. JHG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.06x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IVZ's 0.78x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), JHG scores 8/9 vs IVZ's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.0% | -1.7% | +16.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +9.6% | -0.9% | +8.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +12.1% | -2.3% | +8.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.5% | -2.6% | +8.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.06x | 0.78x | 0.61x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$858M | $8.1B | $2.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.3B | $2.0B | $586M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $396M | $10.1B | $2.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 34.34x | -6.19x | 9.69x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AMG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AMG five years ago would be worth $17,512 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,058 for IVZ. Over the past 12 months, IVZ leads with a +98.8% total return vs JHG's +51.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AMG at 29.2% vs IVZ's 22.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +8.2% | +2.3% | +5.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +51.0% | +98.8% | +77.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +109.7% | +83.0% | +115.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +59.6% | +10.6% | +75.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +197.0% | +23.3% | +89.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +28.0% | +22.3% | +29.2% |
Risk & Volatility
JHG leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
JHG is the less volatile stock with a 0.92 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than IVZ's 1.67 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JHG currently trades 96.2% from its 52-week high vs AMG's 91.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.92x | 1.67x | 1.14x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $53.76 | $29.61 | $334.78 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $34.54 | $14.04 | $170.27 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.2% | +92.4% | +91.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.9 | 66.3 | 59.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.0M | 5.1M | 347K |
Analyst Outlook
IVZ leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: JHG as "Hold", IVZ as "Hold", AMG as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 8.7% upside for IVZ (target: $30) vs -6.2% for JHG (target: $49). IVZ is the only dividend payer here at 3.04% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $48.50 | $29.72 | $331.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 28 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.0% | +0.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.83 | $0.03 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +15.3% | +8.6% |
AMG leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). IVZ leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook).
JHG vs IVZ vs AMG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is JHG or IVZ or AMG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Janus Henderson Group plc (JHG) is the stronger pick with 25.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 1% for Invesco Ltd. (IVZ). Janus Henderson Group plc (JHG) offers the better valuation at 9. 9x trailing P/E (12. 0x 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.
02Which has the better valuation — JHG or IVZ or AMG?
On trailing P/E, Janus Henderson Group plc (JHG) is the cheapest at 9.
9x versus Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. at 13. 5x. On forward P/E, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. wins at 0. 23x versus Janus Henderson Group plc's 0. 24x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — JHG or IVZ or AMG?
Over the past 5 years, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.
(AMG) delivered a total return of +75. 1%, compared to +10. 6% for Invesco Ltd. (IVZ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JHG returned +197. 0% versus IVZ's +23. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — JHG or IVZ or AMG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Janus Henderson Group plc (JHG) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
92β versus Invesco Ltd. 's 1. 67β — meaning IVZ is approximately 82% more volatile than JHG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Janus Henderson Group plc (JHG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 78% for Invesco Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — JHG or IVZ or AMG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Janus Henderson Group plc (JHG) is pulling ahead at 25.
2% versus 5. 1% for Invesco Ltd. (IVZ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Janus Henderson Group plc grew EPS 104. 3% year-over-year, compared to -235. 6% for Invesco Ltd.. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — JHG or IVZ or AMG?
Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.
(AMG) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 3% net margin versus -4. 4% for Invesco Ltd. — 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 -10. 9% for IVZ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AMG leads at 86. 0%, 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.
07Is JHG or IVZ or AMG more undervalued right now?
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, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. (AMG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 23x versus Janus Henderson Group plc's 0. 24x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. (AMG) trades at 9. 2x forward P/E versus 12. 0x for Janus Henderson Group plc — 2. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IVZ: 8. 7% to $29. 72.
08Which pays a better dividend — JHG or IVZ or AMG?
In this comparison, IVZ (3.
0% yield) pays a dividend. JHG, AMG do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is JHG or IVZ or AMG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Janus Henderson Group plc (JHG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
92), +197. 0% 10Y return). Invesco Ltd. (IVZ) carries a higher beta of 1. 67 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (JHG: +197. 0%, IVZ: +23. 3%), 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.
10What are the main differences between JHG and IVZ and AMG?
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: JHG is a small-cap high-growth stock; IVZ is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; AMG is a small-cap high-growth stock. IVZ pays a dividend while JHG, AMG do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.