Insurance - Life
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ABLLL vs HIFS vs NBTB vs ABL vs LPLA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Insurance - Life
Financial - Capital Markets
ABLLL vs HIFS vs NBTB vs ABL vs LPLA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Life | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Insurance - Life | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $2.50B | $626M | $2.35B | $791M | $24.83B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $197M | $217M | $867M | $0.00 | $16.99B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $11M | $45M | $169M | $37M | $863M |
| Gross Margin | 87.5% | 30.1% | 72.1% | — | 25.6% |
| Operating Margin | 25.0% | 16.8% | 25.3% | — | 13.4% |
| Forward P/E | 25.7x | 20.4x | 10.8x | 8.1x | 13.8x |
| Total Debt | $386M | $1.50B | $327M | $0.00 | $7.26B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $132M | $352M | $185M | $-385K | $1.04B |
ABLLL vs HIFS vs NBTB vs ABL vs LPLA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 23 | Mar 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abacus Life, Inc. 9… (ABLLL) | 100 | 103.8 | +3.8% |
| Hingham Institution… (HIFS) | 100 | 171.2 | +71.2% |
| NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) | 100 | 120.2 | +20.2% |
| Abacus Global Manag… (ABL) | 100 | 132.3 | +32.3% |
| LPL Financial Holdi… (LPLA) | 100 | 135.1 | +35.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ABLLL vs HIFS vs NBTB vs ABL vs LPLA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ABLLL has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 68.6%, EPS growth -312.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 70.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.03, Low D/E 91.2%, current ratio 2.55x
- 68.6% revenue growth vs ABL's -100.0%
- Beta 0.03 vs HIFS's 1.25, lower leverage
HIFS is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +14.4% vs LPLA's -7.1%
NBTB is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 3.2%
- Beta 0.89, yield 3.2%, current ratio 1.60x
- NIM 3.1% vs HIFS's 1.0%
- 19.5% margin vs LPLA's 5.1%
ABL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.12 vs NBTB's 1.53
- Lower P/E (8.1x vs 13.8x), PEG 0.12 vs 1.04
- 5.6% ROA vs HIFS's 1.0%, ROIC 52.3% vs 1.4%
LPLA is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 12.4% 10Y total return vs NBTB's 102.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 68.6% revenue growth vs ABL's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.1x vs 13.8x), PEG 0.12 vs 1.04 | |
| Quality / Margins | 19.5% margin vs LPLA's 5.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.03 vs HIFS's 1.25, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.2% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs HIFS's 0.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +14.4% vs LPLA's -7.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.6% ROA vs HIFS's 1.0%, ROIC 52.3% vs 1.4% |
ABLLL vs HIFS vs NBTB vs ABL vs LPLA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
ABLLL vs HIFS vs NBTB vs ABL vs LPLA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NBTB leads in 3 of 6 categories
ABL leads 1 • LPLA leads 1 • ABLLL leads 1 • HIFS leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NBTB leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LPLA and ABL operate at a comparable scale, with $17.0B and $0 in trailing revenue. NBTB is the more profitable business, keeping 19.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LPLA's 5.1%. On growth, ABLLL holds the edge at +123.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $197M | $217M | $867M | $0 | $17.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $66M | $62M | $241M | $107M | $2.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $11M | $45M | $169M | $37M | $863M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$111M | $30M | $225M | -$49M | -$1.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +87.5% | +30.1% | +72.1% | — | +25.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +25.0% | +16.8% | +25.3% | — | +13.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.6% | +13.0% | +19.5% | — | +5.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -56.6% | +5.4% | +25.2% | — | -5.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +123.7% | — | — | -5.9% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +191.7% | +195.1% | +39.5% | +134.1% | +4.2% |
Valuation Metrics
NBTB leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.5x trailing earnings, NBTB trades at a 52% valuation discount to LPLA's 28.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABL offers better value at 0.12x vs LPLA's 2.14x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.5B | $626M | $2.4B | $791M | $24.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.8B | $1.8B | $2.5B | $1.0B | $31.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -75.31x | 22.33x | 13.53x | -23.79x | 28.35x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 25.66x | 20.43x | 10.80x | 8.11x | 13.77x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.92x | 0.12x | 2.14x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 392.45x | 47.53x | 10.35x | 148.79x | 10.65x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 22.35x | 2.88x | 2.71x | 7.07x | 1.46x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.28x | 1.46x | 1.21x | 1.35x | 4.58x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 53.27x | 10.75x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
ABL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LPLA delivers a 18.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $19 in annual profit, vs $3 for ABLLL. NBTB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HIFS's 3.47x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NBTB scores 7/9 vs ABLLL's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +2.5% | +9.8% | +9.5% | +11.3% | +18.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.2% | +1.0% | +1.1% | +5.6% | +5.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.1% | +1.4% | +7.9% | +52.3% | +16.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.2% | +2.2% | +2.4% | +22.0% | +19.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.91x | 3.47x | 0.17x | — | 1.36x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $254M | $1.1B | $142M | $384,618 | $6.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $132M | $352M | $185M | -$384,618 | $1.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $386M | $1.5B | $327M | $0 | $7.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.74x | 0.44x | 1.05x | 3.98x | 3.85x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LPLA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LPLA five years ago would be worth $20,210 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,459 for ABL. Over the past 12 months, HIFS leads with a +14.4% total return vs LPLA's -7.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LPLA at 17.5% vs ABL's -7.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +5.4% | +6.3% | +9.3% | +2.1% | -14.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +12.5% | +14.4% | +9.0% | +0.5% | -7.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +25.1% | +61.9% | +54.1% | -19.5% | +62.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +25.1% | -1.9% | +29.9% | -15.4% | +102.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +25.1% | +142.5% | +102.2% | -14.6% | +1240.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +7.8% | +17.4% | +15.5% | -7.0% | +17.5% |
Risk & Volatility
ABLLL leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABLLL is the less volatile stock with a 0.03 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HIFS's 1.25 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ABLLL currently trades 97.2% from its 52-week high vs LPLA's 76.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.03x | 1.25x | 0.89x | 1.11x | 1.10x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $26.35 | $338.00 | $46.92 | $10.50 | $403.58 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $20.52 | $220.76 | $39.20 | $4.60 | $281.51 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.2% | +84.9% | +96.1% | +77.0% | +76.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.1 | 51.0 | 57.3 | 36.8 | 53.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5K | 51K | 236K | 641K | 875K |
Analyst Outlook
NBTB leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NBTB as "Hold", ABL as "Buy", LPLA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.4% upside for LPLA (target: $441) vs 2.1% for NBTB (target: $46). For income investors, NBTB offers the higher dividend yield at 3.17% vs LPLA's 0.39%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $46.00 | $11.00 | $441.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 10 | 2 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.9% | +3.2% | — | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.50 | $1.43 | $0.00 | $1.19 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.4% | 0.0% | +0.4% | +1.4% | +0.5% |
NBTB leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ABL leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency).
ABLLL vs HIFS vs NBTB vs ABL vs LPLA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ABLLL or HIFS or NBTB or ABL or LPLA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Abacus Life, Inc.
9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028 (ABLLL) is the stronger pick with 68. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Abacus Global Management, Inc. (ABL). NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) offers the better valuation at 13. 5x trailing P/E (10. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Abacus Global Management, Inc. (ABL) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — ABLLL or HIFS or NBTB or ABL or LPLA?
On trailing P/E, NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is the cheapest at 13. 5x versus LPL Financial Holdings Inc. at 28. 4x. On forward P/E, Abacus Global Management, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 1x — 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: Abacus Global Management, Inc. wins at 0. 12x versus NBT Bancorp Inc. 's 1. 53x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ABLLL or HIFS or NBTB or ABL or LPLA?
Over the past 5 years, LPL Financial Holdings Inc.
(LPLA) delivered a total return of +102. 1%, compared to -15. 4% for Abacus Global Management, Inc. (ABL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LPLA returned +1241% versus ABL's -14. 6%. 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 — ABLLL or HIFS or NBTB or ABL or LPLA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Abacus Life, Inc.
9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028 (ABLLL) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 03β versus Hingham Institution for Savings's 1. 25β — meaning HIFS is approximately 3957% more volatile than ABLLL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 3% for Hingham Institution for Savings — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ABLLL or HIFS or NBTB or ABL or LPLA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Abacus Life, Inc.
9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028 (ABLLL) is pulling ahead at 68. 6% versus -100. 0% for Abacus Global Management, Inc. (ABL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Abacus Global Management, Inc. grew EPS 211. 8% year-over-year, compared to -312. 5% for Abacus Life, Inc. 9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028. 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 — ABLLL or HIFS or NBTB or ABL or LPLA?
NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is the more profitable company, earning 19. 5% net margin versus -21. 4% for Abacus Life, Inc. 9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028 — meaning it keeps 19. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NBTB leads at 25. 3% versus -0. 8% for ABLLL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ABLLL leads at 89. 8%, 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 ABLLL or HIFS or NBTB or ABL or LPLA 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, Abacus Global Management, Inc. (ABL) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 12x versus NBT Bancorp Inc. 's 1. 53x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Abacus Global Management, Inc. (ABL) trades at 8. 1x forward P/E versus 25. 7x for Abacus Life, Inc. 9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028 — 17. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LPLA: 42. 4% to $441. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — ABLLL or HIFS or NBTB or ABL or LPLA?
In this comparison, NBTB (3.
2% yield), HIFS (0. 9% yield), LPLA (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. ABLLL, ABL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ABLLL or HIFS or NBTB or ABL or LPLA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Abacus Life, Inc.
9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028 (ABLLL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 03)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABLLL: +25. 1%, ABL: -14. 6%), 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 ABLLL and HIFS and NBTB and ABL and LPLA?
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: ABLLL is a small-cap high-growth stock; HIFS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NBTB is a small-cap deep-value stock; ABL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LPLA is a mid-cap high-growth stock. HIFS, NBTB pay a dividend while ABLLL, ABL, LPLA 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.