ACT vs FNF

For growth investors, Fidelity National Financial, Inc.

(FNF) is the stronger pick with 15. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 4% for Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT). Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT) offers the better valuation at 9. 4x trailing P/E (8. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fidelity National Financial, Inc. (FNF) a "Buy" — based on 17 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, Enact Holdings, Inc.

(ACT) is the cheapest at 9. 4x versus Fidelity National Financial, Inc. at 11. 0x. On forward P/E, Enact Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Enact Holdings, Inc. wins at 1. 81x versus Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 's 2. 24x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Enact Holdings, Inc.

(ACT) delivered a total return of +135. 0%, compared to +37. 0% for Fidelity National Financial, Inc. (FNF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FNF returned +181. 8% versus ACT's +135. 0%. 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), Enact Holdings, Inc.

(ACT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 28β versus Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 's 0. 58β — meaning FNF is approximately 107% more volatile than ACT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 55% for Fidelity National Financial, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Fidelity National Financial, Inc.

(FNF) is pulling ahead at 15. 9% versus 2. 4% for Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fidelity National Financial, Inc. grew EPS 143. 5% year-over-year, compared to 3. 4% for Enact Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ACT leads at 4. 0% 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.

Enact Holdings, Inc.

(ACT) is the more profitable company, earning 54. 8% net margin versus 9. 5% for Fidelity National Financial, Inc. — meaning it keeps 54. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ACT leads at 69. 8% versus 13. 0% for FNF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ACT leads at 91. 1%, 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, Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 81x versus Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 's 2. 24x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT) trades at 8. 8x forward P/E versus 8. 9x for Fidelity National Financial, Inc. — 0. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FNF: 30. 9% to $67. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Fidelity National Financial, Inc. (FNF) offers the highest yield at 3. 8%, versus 1. 9% for Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Enact Holdings, Inc.

(ACT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 28), 1. 9% yield, +135. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ACT: +135. 0%, FNF: +181. 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.

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: ACT is a small-cap deep-value stock; FNF is a mid-cap high-growth 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.