PRS
Prudential Financial, Inc. 5.62
Insurance - Life
Market Cap$7.99B
5Y Perf.-14.3%
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Try these comparisons:
Stock Comparison
PRS vs MET
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
MET
MetLife, Inc.
Insurance - Life
Market Cap$52.27B
5Y Perf.+122.6%
PRS vs MET — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | PRS | MET |
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Life | Insurance - Life |
| Market Cap | $7.99B | $52.27B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $62.83B | $76.13B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $3.47B | $3.38B |
| Gross Margin | 32.2% | 25.6% |
| Operating Margin | 6.1% | 6.1% |
| Forward P/E | 1.6x | 8.2x |
| Total Debt | $33.28B | $20.18B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $19.75B | $22.03B |
PRS vs MET — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
PRS
MET
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prudential Financia… (PRS) | 100 | 85.7 | -14.3% |
| MetLife, Inc. (MET) | 100 | 222.6 | +122.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PRS vs MET
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: PRS leads in 4 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for valuation and capital efficiency and profitability and margin quality. MetLife, Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for growth and revenue expansion and recent price momentum and sentiment. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
PRS
Prudential Financial, Inc. 5.62
The Insurance Pick
PRS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.77, yield 23.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.77, Low D/E 93.5%
- Beta 0.77, yield 23.7%
Best for: income & stability and sleep-well-at-night
MET
MetLife, Inc.
The Insurance Pick
MET is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 10.2%, EPS growth -19.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.3%
- 156.8% 10Y total return vs PRS's 34.1%
- 10.2% revenue growth vs PRS's -13.7%
Best for: growth exposure and long-term compounding
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | MET | 10.2% revenue growth vs PRS's -13.7% |
| Value | PRS | Lower P/E (1.6x vs 8.2x) |
| Quality / Margins | PRS | Combined ratio 0.9 vs MET's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting) |
| Stability / Safety | PRS | Beta 0.77 vs MET's 1.09 |
| Dividends | PRS | 23.7% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs MET's 2.8% |
| Momentum (1Y) | MET | +7.9% vs PRS's +6.0% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | MET | 0.5% ROA vs PRS's 0.5%, ROIC 13.1% vs 8.0% |
PRS vs MET — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FY 2025
FY 2025
PRS vs MET — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLPRSLAGGINGMET
METMetLife, Inc.
2leads
PRSPrudential Financial,…
2leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs METMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
Tied
—
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
PRS6/6
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
MET8/8
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
MET6/6
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
Tied
—
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
PRS2/2
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — PRS and MET each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MET and PRS operate at a comparable scale, with $76.1B and $62.8B in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 5.5% (PRS) to 4.4% (MET). On growth, MET holds the edge at +29.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | METMetLife, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $62.8B | $76.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $4.1B | $5.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $3.5B | $3.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $9.8B | $18.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +32.2% | +25.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.1% | +6.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.5% | +4.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +15.6% | +23.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +15.3% | +29.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -12.8% | -34.3% |
Evenly matched — PRS and MET each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
PRS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 2.3x trailing earnings, PRS trades at a 86% valuation discount to MET's 16.7x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, PRS's 4.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than MET's 8.8x.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | METMetLife, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.0B | $52.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $21.5B | $50.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 2.30x | 16.70x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1.60x | 8.19x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 4.38x | 8.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.13x | 0.68x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.23x | 1.84x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 1.27x | 2.89x |
PRS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MET leads this category, winning 8 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MET delivers a 11.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $10 for PRS. MET carries lower financial leverage with a 0.70x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PRS's 0.94x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MET scores 8/9 vs PRS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | METMetLife, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.2% | +11.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.5% | +0.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.0% | +13.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.6% | +1.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.94x | 0.70x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $13.5B | -$1.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $19.7B | $22.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $33.3B | $20.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 5.39x |
MET leads this category, winning 8 of 8 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MET leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MET five years ago would be worth $13,534 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,728 for PRS. Over the past 12 months, MET leads with a +7.9% total return vs PRS's +6.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MET at 17.3% vs PRS's 3.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | METMetLife, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -2.8% | +0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +6.0% | +7.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.9% | +61.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +7.3% | +35.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +34.1% | +156.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +3.2% | +17.3% |
MET leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PRS and MET each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PRS is the less volatile stock with a 0.77 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MET's 1.09 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MET currently trades 95.8% from its 52-week high vs PRS's 91.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | METMetLife, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.77x | 1.09x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $25.19 | $83.64 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.84 | $67.33 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +91.1% | +95.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.5 | 66.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 34K | 3.5M |
Evenly matched — PRS and MET each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
PRS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
For income investors, PRS offers the higher dividend yield at 23.73% vs MET's 2.83%.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | METMetLife, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $96.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 33 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +23.7% | +2.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 14 | 13 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $5.45 | $2.27 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +12.5% | +7.4% |
PRS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway
PRS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). MET leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 2 tied.
Best OverallPrudential Financial, Inc. … (PRS)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
PRS vs MET: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PRS or MET a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MetLife, Inc.
(MET) is the stronger pick with 10. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 7% for Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 (PRS). Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 (PRS) offers the better valuation at 2. 3x trailing P/E (1. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MetLife, Inc. (MET) a "Buy" — based on 33 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 — PRS or MET?
On trailing P/E, Prudential Financial, Inc.
5. 62 (PRS) is the cheapest at 2. 3x versus MetLife, Inc. at 16. 7x. On forward P/E, Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 is actually cheaper at 1. 6x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PRS or MET?
Over the past 5 years, MetLife, Inc.
(MET) delivered a total return of +35. 3%, compared to +7. 3% for Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 (PRS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MET returned +156. 8% versus PRS's +34. 1%. 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 — PRS or MET?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Prudential Financial, Inc.
5. 62 (PRS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 77β versus MetLife, Inc. 's 1. 09β — meaning MET is approximately 41% more volatile than PRS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, MetLife, Inc. (MET) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 70% versus 94% for Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PRS or MET?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MetLife, Inc.
(MET) is pulling ahead at 10. 2% versus -13. 7% for Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 (PRS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 grew EPS 33. 2% year-over-year, compared to -19. 2% for MetLife, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MET leads at 4. 3% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — PRS or MET?
Prudential Financial, Inc.
5. 62 (PRS) is the more profitable company, earning 5. 9% net margin versus 4. 4% for MetLife, Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PRS leads at 7. 9% versus 6. 0% for MET. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PRS leads at 42. 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 PRS or MET more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Prudential Financial, Inc.
5. 62 (PRS) trades at 1. 6x forward P/E versus 8. 2x for MetLife, Inc. — 6. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.
08Which pays a better dividend — PRS or MET?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 (PRS) offers the highest yield at 23. 7%, versus 2. 8% for MetLife, Inc. (MET).
09Is PRS or MET better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Prudential Financial, Inc.
5. 62 (PRS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 77), 23. 7% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PRS: +34. 1%, MET: +156. 8%), 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 PRS and MET?
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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
Revenue Growth>
%
(PRS: 15.3% · MET: 29.1%)Net Margin>
%
(PRS: 5.5% · MET: 4.4%)P/E Ratio<
x
(PRS: 2.3x · MET: 16.7x)You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.