ALTI vs CNNE vs KKR vs BAM

For growth investors, Brookfield Asset Management Ltd.

(BAM) is the stronger pick with -2. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -16. 2% for AlTi Global, Inc. (ALTI). Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. (BAM) offers the better valuation at 38. 1x trailing P/E (26. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate AlTi Global, Inc. (ALTI) a "Strong Buy" — based on 1 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, Brookfield Asset Management Ltd.

(BAM) is the cheapest at 38. 1x versus KKR & Co. Inc. at 42. 9x. On forward P/E, AlTi Global, Inc. is actually cheaper at 13. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, KKR & Co.

Inc. (KKR) delivered a total return of +76. 5%, compared to -60. 6% for AlTi Global, Inc. (ALTI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KKR returned +715. 5% versus ALTI's -60. 8%. 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), Cannae Holdings, Inc.

(CNNE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 98β versus KKR & Co. Inc. 's 1. 70β — meaning KKR is approximately 74% more volatile than CNNE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AlTi Global, Inc. (ALTI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 67% for KKR & Co. Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Brookfield Asset Management Ltd.

(BAM) is pulling ahead at -2. 0% versus -16. 2% for AlTi Global, Inc. (ALTI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: AlTi Global, Inc. grew EPS 52. 2% year-over-year, compared to -92. 0% for Cannae Holdings, Inc.. 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.

Brookfield Asset Management Ltd.

(BAM) is the more profitable company, earning 54. 5% net margin versus -99. 2% for Cannae Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 54. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BAM leads at 69. 4% versus -42. 0% for ALTI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BAM leads at 71. 0%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, AlTi Global, Inc.

(ALTI) trades at 13. 6x forward P/E versus 26. 4x for Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. — 12. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ALTI: 135. 6% to $9. 00.

In this comparison, ALTI (2.

2% yield), KKR (0. 8% yield), BAM (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. CNNE does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, KKR & Co.

Inc. (KKR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (0. 8% yield, +715. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KKR: +715. 5%, CNNE: -18. 2%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (ALTI (Financial Services) and CNNE (Consumer Cyclical) and KKR (Financial Services) and BAM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

ALTI, KKR, BAM pay a dividend while CNNE does 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.