Insurance - Life
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ABLLL vs LPLA vs CSWC vs RJF vs ARCC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Asset Management
Financial - Capital Markets
Asset Management
ABLLL vs LPLA vs CSWC vs RJF vs ARCC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Life | Financial - Capital Markets | Asset Management | Financial - Capital Markets | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $2.50B | $24.83B | $1.43B | $30.26B | $13.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $197M | $16.99B | $164M | $15.91B | $3.15B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $11M | $863M | $103M | $2.15B | $1.15B |
| Gross Margin | 87.5% | 25.6% | 66.5% | 88.2% | 75.7% |
| Operating Margin | 25.0% | 13.4% | 48.5% | 28.7% | 69.7% |
| Forward P/E | 25.7x | 13.8x | 10.1x | 12.9x | 9.9x |
| Total Debt | $386M | $7.26B | $956M | $4.54B | $15.99B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $132M | $1.04B | $43M | $11.39B | $924M |
ABLLL vs LPLA vs CSWC vs RJF vs ARCC — 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% |
| LPL Financial Holdi… (LPLA) | 100 | 135.1 | +35.1% |
| Capital Southwest C… (CSWC) | 100 | 97.1 | -2.9% |
| Raymond James Finan… (RJF) | 100 | 145.6 | +45.6% |
| Ares Capital Corpor… (ARCC) | 100 | 93.9 | -6.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ABLLL vs LPLA vs CSWC vs RJF vs ARCC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ABLLL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.03, Low D/E 91.2%, current ratio 2.55x
- 68.6% revenue growth vs CSWC's 7.7%
- Beta 0.03 vs LPLA's 1.10, lower leverage
LPLA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 37.2%, EPS growth -22.2%
- 12.4% 10Y total return vs RJF's 394.5%
- 5.1% ROA vs ABLLL's 1.2%, ROIC 16.1% vs -0.1%
CSWC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and bank quality.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.84, yield 10.2%
- NIM 7.0% vs RJF's 2.4%
- 43.1% margin vs LPLA's 5.1%
- 10.2% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs RJF's 1.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
RJF is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.60 vs LPLA's 1.04
ARCC is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 0.77, yield 2.0%, current ratio 1.71x
- Lower P/E (9.9x vs 10.1x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 68.6% revenue growth vs CSWC's 7.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.9x vs 10.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 43.1% margin vs LPLA's 5.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.03 vs LPLA's 1.10, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 10.2% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs RJF's 1.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +34.0% vs LPLA's -7.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.1% ROA vs ABLLL's 1.2%, ROIC 16.1% vs -0.1% |
ABLLL vs LPLA vs CSWC vs RJF vs ARCC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
ABLLL vs LPLA vs CSWC vs RJF vs ARCC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ARCC leads in 2 of 6 categories
RJF leads 1 • ABLLL leads 0 • LPLA leads 0 • CSWC leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARCC leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LPLA is the larger business by revenue, generating $17.0B annually — 103.7x CSWC's $164M. CSWC is the more profitable business, keeping 43.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LPLA's 5.1%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $197M | $17.0B | $164M | $15.9B | $3.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $66M | $2.3B | $142M | $2.9B | $2.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $11M | $863M | $103M | $2.1B | $1.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$111M | -$1.1B | -$69M | $1.5B | $1.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +87.5% | +25.6% | +66.5% | +88.2% | +75.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +25.0% | +13.4% | +48.5% | +28.7% | +69.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.6% | +5.1% | +43.1% | +13.4% | +41.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -56.6% | -5.8% | -132.6% | +14.1% | +36.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +123.7% | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +191.7% | +4.2% | +113.3% | +15.3% | -63.9% |
Valuation Metrics
ARCC leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.2x trailing earnings, ARCC trades at a 64% valuation discount to LPLA's 28.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), RJF offers better value at 0.69x vs LPLA's 2.14x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.5B | $24.8B | $1.4B | $30.3B | $13.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.8B | $31.0B | $2.3B | $23.4B | $28.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -75.31x | 28.35x | 16.32x | 14.91x | 10.19x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 25.66x | 13.77x | 10.06x | 12.90x | 9.92x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.14x | — | 0.69x | 0.99x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 392.45x | 10.65x | 27.43x | 4.92x | 13.09x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 22.35x | 1.46x | 8.71x | 1.90x | 4.33x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.28x | 4.58x | 1.39x | 2.54x | 0.93x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 13.47x | 11.92x |
Profitability & Efficiency
RJF leads this category, winning 5 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. RJF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.36x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LPLA's 1.36x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RJF scores 6/9 vs CSWC's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +2.5% | +18.6% | +10.3% | +16.4% | +8.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.2% | +5.1% | +4.8% | +2.5% | +3.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.1% | +16.1% | +3.5% | +20.9% | +5.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.2% | +19.1% | +4.6% | +22.0% | +7.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.91x | 1.36x | 1.08x | 0.36x | 1.12x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $254M | $6.2B | $913M | -$6.8B | $15.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $132M | $1.0B | $43M | $11.4B | $924M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $386M | $7.3B | $956M | $4.5B | $16.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.74x | 3.85x | 2.91x | 1.57x | 2.98x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — LPLA and CSWC and RJF each lead in 2 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 $12,514 for ABLLL. Over the past 12 months, CSWC leads with a +34.0% total return vs LPLA's -7.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RJF at 22.7% vs ABLLL's 7.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +5.4% | -14.3% | +11.4% | -5.5% | -4.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +12.5% | -7.1% | +34.0% | +8.7% | +0.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +25.1% | +62.2% | +75.8% | +84.9% | +34.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +25.1% | +102.1% | +51.4% | +77.8% | +47.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +25.1% | +1240.6% | +234.2% | +394.5% | +139.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +7.8% | +17.5% | +20.7% | +22.7% | +10.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ABLLL and CSWC each lead in 1 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 LPLA's 1.10 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CSWC currently trades 98.2% 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 | 1.10x | 0.84x | 1.05x | 0.77x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $26.35 | $403.58 | $24.43 | $177.66 | $23.42 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $20.52 | $281.51 | $19.37 | $138.82 | $17.40 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.2% | +76.7% | +98.2% | +86.4% | +81.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.1 | 53.3 | 63.7 | 65.1 | 56.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5K | 875K | 664K | 1.3M | 7.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CSWC and RJF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LPLA as "Buy", CSWC as "Buy", RJF as "Hold", ARCC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.4% upside for LPLA (target: $441) vs -6.2% for CSWC (target: $23). For income investors, CSWC offers the higher dividend yield at 10.20% vs LPLA's 0.39%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $441.00 | $22.50 | $169.00 | $21.88 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 22 | 10 | 24 | 32 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.4% | +10.2% | +1.3% | +2.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 4 | 3 | 22 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.19 | $2.45 | $2.01 | $0.38 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.4% | +0.5% | 0.0% | +4.2% | 0.0% |
ARCC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). RJF leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
ABLLL vs LPLA vs CSWC vs RJF vs ARCC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ABLLL or LPLA or CSWC or RJF or ARCC 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 7. 7% for Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC). Ares Capital Corporation (ARCC) offers the better valuation at 10. 2x trailing P/E (9. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate LPL Financial Holdings Inc. (LPLA) a "Buy" — based on 22 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 LPLA or CSWC or RJF or ARCC?
On trailing P/E, Ares Capital Corporation (ARCC) is the cheapest at 10.
2x versus LPL Financial Holdings Inc. at 28. 4x. On forward P/E, Ares Capital Corporation is actually cheaper at 9. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Raymond James Financial, Inc. wins at 0. 60x versus LPL Financial Holdings Inc. 's 1. 04x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ABLLL or LPLA or CSWC or RJF or ARCC?
Over the past 5 years, LPL Financial Holdings Inc.
(LPLA) delivered a total return of +102. 1%, compared to +25. 1% for Abacus Life, Inc. 9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028 (ABLLL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LPLA returned +1241% versus ABLLL's +25. 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 — ABLLL or LPLA or CSWC or RJF or ARCC?
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 LPL Financial Holdings Inc. 's 1. 10β — meaning LPLA is approximately 3476% more volatile than ABLLL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 36% versus 136% for LPL Financial Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ABLLL or LPLA or CSWC or RJF or ARCC?
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 7. 7% for Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Raymond James Financial, Inc. grew EPS 6. 2% 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 LPLA or CSWC or RJF or ARCC?
Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC) is the more profitable company, earning 43.
1% net margin versus -21. 4% for Abacus Life, Inc. 9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028 — meaning it keeps 43. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ARCC leads at 69. 7% 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 LPLA or CSWC or RJF or ARCC 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, Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 60x versus LPL Financial Holdings Inc. 's 1. 04x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Ares Capital Corporation (ARCC) trades at 9. 9x forward P/E versus 25. 7x for Abacus Life, Inc. 9. 875% Fixed Rate Senior Notes due 2028 — 15. 7x 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 LPLA or CSWC or RJF or ARCC?
In this comparison, CSWC (10.
2% yield), ARCC (2. 0% yield), RJF (1. 3% yield), LPLA (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. ABLLL does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ABLLL or LPLA or CSWC or RJF or ARCC 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%, RJF: +394. 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.
10What are the main differences between ABLLL and LPLA and CSWC and RJF and ARCC?
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; LPLA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; CSWC is a small-cap deep-value stock; RJF is a mid-cap deep-value stock; ARCC is a mid-cap high-growth stock. CSWC, RJF, ARCC pay a dividend while ABLLL, 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.