Insurance - Property & Casualty
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
AFG vs CINF vs MKL vs TRV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Insurance - Property & Casualty
Insurance - Property & Casualty
Insurance - Property & Casualty
AFG vs CINF vs MKL vs TRV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Property & Casualty | Insurance - Property & Casualty | Insurance - Property & Casualty | Insurance - Property & Casualty |
| Market Cap | $10.94B | $25.23B | $22.52B | $64.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $8.14B | $12.92B | $16.57B | $48.83B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $842M | $2.76B | $1.77B | $6.29B |
| Gross Margin | 24.2% | 50.3% | 61.4% | 36.9% |
| Operating Margin | 13.2% | 26.7% | 13.9% | 16.0% |
| Forward P/E | 11.8x | 18.7x | 16.0x | 10.7x |
| Total Debt | $1.82B | $886M | $4.30B | $9.27B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.73B | $1.43B | $3.96B | $842M |
AFG vs CINF vs MKL vs TRV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| American Financial … (AFG) | 100 | 218.6 | +118.6% |
| Cincinnati Financia… (CINF) | 100 | 274.9 | +174.9% |
| Markel Corporation (MKL) | 100 | 200.6 | +100.6% |
| The Travelers Compa… (TRV) | 100 | 279.4 | +179.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AFG vs CINF vs MKL vs TRV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AFG is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.36, yield 5.5%
- 211.6% 10Y total return vs TRV's 201.4%
- Beta 0.36, yield 5.5%, current ratio 0.50x
- 5.5% yield, vs TRV's 1.4%
CINF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 11.4%, EPS growth 4.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 24.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.43, Low D/E 5.6%, current ratio 1.29x
- 11.4% revenue growth vs AFG's -1.3%
- Combined ratio 0.8 vs AFG's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting)
MKL lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
TRV is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.51 vs AFG's 2.81
- Lower P/E (10.7x vs 18.7x), PEG 0.51 vs 1.23
- Beta 0.22 vs MKL's 0.44
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.4% revenue growth vs AFG's -1.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.7x vs 18.7x), PEG 0.51 vs 1.23 | |
| Quality / Margins | Combined ratio 0.8 vs AFG's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.22 vs MKL's 0.44 | |
| Dividends | 5.5% yield, vs TRV's 1.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +14.0% vs MKL's -4.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.8% ROA vs MKL's 3.0%, ROIC 15.3% vs 10.7% |
AFG vs CINF vs MKL vs TRV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
AFG vs CINF vs MKL vs TRV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CINF leads in 2 of 6 categories
TRV leads 2 • MKL leads 1 • AFG leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CINF leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TRV is the larger business by revenue, generating $48.8B annually — 6.0x AFG's $8.1B. CINF is the more profitable business, keeping 21.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AFG's 10.3%. On growth, CINF holds the edge at +11.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $8.1B | $12.9B | $16.6B | $48.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.2B | $3.6B | $2.5B | $8.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $842M | $2.8B | $1.8B | $6.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.5B | $3.4B | $2.2B | $7.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +24.2% | +50.3% | +61.4% | +36.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +13.2% | +26.7% | +13.9% | +16.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.3% | +21.3% | +10.7% | +12.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +17.9% | +26.7% | +13.2% | +16.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.0% | +11.6% | +6.7% | +3.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +18.1% | +4.0% | -2.6% | +23.4% |
Valuation Metrics
MKL leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.6x trailing earnings, MKL trades at a 19% valuation discount to AFG's 13.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MKL offers better value at 0.43x vs AFG's 3.12x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $10.9B | $25.2B | $22.5B | $64.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $11.0B | $24.7B | $22.9B | $73.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.07x | 10.68x | 10.64x | 10.90x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.76x | 18.69x | 15.99x | 10.69x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.12x | 0.70x | 0.43x | 0.52x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.52x | 7.84x | 7.78x | 8.62x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.34x | 2.00x | 1.36x | 1.32x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.28x | 1.61x | 1.20x | 2.07x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 7.83x | 8.16x | 8.82x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CINF leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TRV delivers a 19.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $19 in annual profit, vs $10 for MKL. CINF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.06x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AFG's 0.38x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MKL scores 7/9 vs CINF's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +18.2% | +18.0% | +9.6% | +19.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.1% | +6.8% | +3.0% | +4.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +16.3% | +15.3% | +10.7% | +15.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.9% | +14.0% | +14.9% | +8.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.38x | 0.06x | 0.23x | 0.28x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $93M | -$545M | $339M | $8.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.7B | $1.4B | $4.0B | $842M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.8B | $886M | $4.3B | $9.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 14.41x | 46.68x | 12.00x | 19.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TRV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TRV five years ago would be worth $19,818 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,737 for CINF. Over the past 12 months, CINF leads with a +14.0% total return vs MKL's -4.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TRV at 19.5% vs MKL's 9.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +0.1% | +0.9% | -15.5% | +5.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +13.6% | +14.0% | -4.1% | +12.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +33.4% | +62.2% | +31.0% | +70.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +56.3% | +47.4% | +47.5% | +98.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +211.6% | +180.5% | +89.3% | +201.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +10.1% | +17.5% | +9.4% | +19.5% |
Risk & Volatility
TRV leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TRV is the less volatile stock with a 0.22 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MKL's 0.44 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TRV currently trades 95.4% from its 52-week high vs MKL's 81.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.36x | 0.43x | 0.44x | 0.22x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $150.02 | $174.27 | $2207.59 | $313.12 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $120.52 | $143.37 | $1719.41 | $249.19 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.8% | +93.0% | +81.5% | +95.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.0 | 43.6 | 34.5 | 50.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 558K | 684K | 59K | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — AFG and TRV each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AFG as "Hold", CINF as "Buy", MKL as "Hold", TRV as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 16.6% upside for AFG (target: $154) vs 4.7% for TRV (target: $313). For income investors, AFG offers the higher dividend yield at 5.51% vs TRV's 1.44%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $153.50 | $173.50 | $1950.00 | $313.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 17 | 17 | 15 | 43 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +5.5% | +2.1% | +2.7% | +1.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 7 | 6 | 20 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $7.26 | $3.33 | $48.55 | $4.30 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.9% | +0.8% | +1.9% | +4.8% |
CINF leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). TRV leads in 2 (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
AFG vs CINF vs MKL vs TRV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AFG or CINF or MKL or TRV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Cincinnati Financial Corporation (CINF) is the stronger pick with 11.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 3% for American Financial Group, Inc. (AFG). Markel Corporation (MKL) offers the better valuation at 10. 6x trailing P/E (16. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Cincinnati Financial Corporation (CINF) 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.
02Which has the better valuation — AFG or CINF or MKL or TRV?
On trailing P/E, Markel Corporation (MKL) is the cheapest at 10.
6x versus American Financial Group, Inc. at 13. 1x. On forward P/E, The Travelers Companies, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 7x — 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: The Travelers Companies, Inc. wins at 0. 51x versus American Financial Group, Inc. 's 2. 81x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AFG or CINF or MKL or TRV?
Over the past 5 years, The Travelers Companies, Inc.
(TRV) delivered a total return of +98. 2%, compared to +47. 4% for Cincinnati Financial Corporation (CINF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AFG returned +211. 6% versus MKL's +89. 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 — AFG or CINF or MKL or TRV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Travelers Companies, Inc.
(TRV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 22β versus Markel Corporation's 0. 44β — meaning MKL is approximately 97% more volatile than TRV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Cincinnati Financial Corporation (CINF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 38% for American Financial Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AFG or CINF or MKL or TRV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cincinnati Financial Corporation (CINF) is pulling ahead at 11.
4% versus -1. 3% for American Financial Group, Inc. (AFG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Travelers Companies, Inc. grew EPS 27. 8% year-over-year, compared to -15. 1% for Markel Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, CINF leads at 24. 4% 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 — AFG or CINF or MKL or TRV?
Cincinnati Financial Corporation (CINF) is the more profitable company, earning 18.
9% net margin versus 10. 3% for American Financial Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 18. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CINF leads at 23. 6% versus 13. 1% for AFG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MKL leads at 69. 4%, 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 AFG or CINF or MKL or TRV 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, The Travelers Companies, Inc. (TRV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 51x versus American Financial Group, Inc. 's 2. 81x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, The Travelers Companies, Inc. (TRV) trades at 10. 7x forward P/E versus 18. 7x for Cincinnati Financial Corporation — 8. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AFG: 16. 6% to $153. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — AFG or CINF or MKL or TRV?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
American Financial Group, Inc. (AFG) offers the highest yield at 5. 5%, versus 1. 4% for The Travelers Companies, Inc. (TRV).
09Is AFG or CINF or MKL or TRV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Travelers Companies, Inc.
(TRV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 22), 1. 4% yield, +201. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TRV: +201. 4%, MKL: +89. 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 AFG and CINF and MKL and TRV?
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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.