AMBC vs AGO vs MBI vs RDN

For growth investors, MBIA Inc.

(MBI) is the stronger pick with 90. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 4% for Radian Group Inc. (RDN). Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (AMBC) offers the better valuation at 4. 3x trailing P/E (92. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (AMBC) a "Buy" — based on 6 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, Ambac Financial Group, Inc.

(AMBC) is the cheapest at 4. 3x versus Radian Group Inc. at 9. 1x. On forward P/E, Radian Group Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 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: Radian Group Inc. wins at 0. 49x 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, MBIA Inc.

(MBI) delivered a total return of +125. 3%, compared to -64. 6% for Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (AMBC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RDN returned +250. 2% versus AMBC's -60. 6%. 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), Radian Group Inc.

(RDN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 37β versus MBIA Inc. 's 0. 81β — meaning MBI is approximately 118% more volatile than RDN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (AMBC) 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), MBIA Inc.

(MBI) is pulling ahead at 90. 5% versus -3. 4% for Radian Group Inc. (RDN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MBIA Inc. grew EPS 61. 9% year-over-year, compared to -60. 5% for Ambac Financial Group, Inc.. 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 -236. 0% for Ambac Financial Group, Inc. — 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 -226. 3% for MBI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AGO leads at 92. 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, Radian Group Inc. (RDN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 49x 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, Radian Group Inc. (RDN) trades at 7. 6x forward P/E versus 92. 0x for Ambac Financial Group, Inc. — 84. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AMBC: 128. 4% to $14. 00.

In this comparison, RDN (2.

8% yield), AGO (1. 7% yield) pay a dividend. AMBC, MBI do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Radian Group Inc.

(RDN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 37), 2. 8% yield, +250. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (RDN: +250. 2%, AMBC: -60. 6%), 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: AMBC is a small-cap high-growth stock; AGO is a small-cap deep-value stock; MBI is a small-cap high-growth stock; RDN is a small-cap deep-value stock. AGO, RDN pay a dividend while AMBC, MBI 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.