AMBC vs ESNT vs MTG vs RDN vs NMIH

For growth investors, Ambac Financial Group, Inc.

(AMBC) is the stronger pick with 89. 1% 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, NMI Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 5x — 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: NMI Holdings, Inc. wins at 0. 41x versus Essent Group Ltd. 's 2. 23x — 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 -64. 6% for Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (AMBC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NMIH returned +505. 7% 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 Ambac Financial Group, Inc. 's 0. 78β — meaning AMBC is approximately 108% more volatile than RDN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Essent Group Ltd. (ESNT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% versus 24% for Radian Group Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ambac Financial Group, Inc.

(AMBC) is pulling ahead at 89. 1% versus -3. 4% for Radian Group Inc. (RDN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: NMI Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 11. 1% year-over-year, compared to -60. 5% for Ambac Financial Group, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NMIH leads at 10. 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.

MGIC Investment Corporation (MTG) is the more profitable company, earning 60.

8% net margin versus -236. 0% for Ambac Financial Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 60. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MTG leads at 76. 5% versus -25. 4% for AMBC. 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, NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 41x versus Essent Group Ltd. 's 2. 23x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, NMI Holdings, Inc. (NMIH) trades at 7. 5x forward P/E versus 92. 0x for Ambac Financial Group, Inc. — 84. 5x 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), MTG (2. 2% yield), ESNT (1. 8% yield) pay a dividend. AMBC, NMIH do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

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%, 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; ESNT is a small-cap deep-value stock; MTG is a small-cap deep-value stock; RDN is a small-cap deep-value stock; NMIH is a small-cap deep-value stock. ESNT, MTG, RDN pay a dividend while AMBC, NMIH 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.