AGO vs MTG

For growth investors, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the stronger pick with 0.

5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 2% for Assured Guaranty Ltd. (AGO). Assured Guaranty Ltd. (AGO) offers the better valuation at 8. 1x trailing P/E (12. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Assured Guaranty Ltd. (AGO) a "Buy" — based on 9 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, Assured Guaranty Ltd.

(AGO) is the cheapest at 8. 1x versus MGIC Investment Corporation at 8. 5x. On forward P/E, MGIC Investment Corporation is actually cheaper at 8. 6x — 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: MGIC Investment Corporation wins at 0. 44x versus Assured Guaranty Ltd. 's 1. 09x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) delivered a total return of +101.

0%, compared to +81. 6% for Assured Guaranty Ltd. (AGO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MTG returned +333. 0% versus AGO's +249. 3%. 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), MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

43β versus Assured Guaranty Ltd. 's 0. 45β — meaning AGO is approximately 5% more volatile than MTG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 29% for Assured Guaranty Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is pulling ahead at 0.

5% versus -3. 2% for Assured Guaranty Ltd. (AGO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Assured Guaranty Ltd. grew EPS 48. 2% year-over-year, compared to 8. 7% for MGIC Investment Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, AGO leads at 4. 8% 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.

Assured Guaranty Ltd.

(AGO) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus 60. 8% for MGIC Investment Corporation — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AGO leads at 84. 0% versus 76. 5% for MTG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MTG leads at 94. 9%, 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, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 44x versus Assured Guaranty Ltd. 's 1. 09x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) trades at 8. 6x forward P/E versus 12. 4x for Assured Guaranty Ltd. — 3. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AGO: 13. 9% to $94. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) offers the highest yield at 2. 2%, versus 1. 7% for Assured Guaranty Ltd. (AGO).

For long-horizon retirement investors, MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

43), 2. 2% yield, +333. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MTG: +333. 0%, AGO: +249. 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.

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.