Asset Management
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
AMP vs EQH vs LNC vs PRU
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Insurance - Diversified
Insurance - Life
Insurance - Life
AMP vs EQH vs LNC vs PRU — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Insurance - Diversified | Insurance - Life | Insurance - Life |
| Market Cap | $45.77B | $12.31B | $6.41B | $34.86B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $18.91B | $10.99B | $18.46B | $61.82B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $3.56B | $-1.38B | $2.11B | $3.48B |
| Gross Margin | 50.4% | 59.2% | 26.0% | 30.8% |
| Operating Margin | 25.5% | -10.9% | 13.7% | 8.2% |
| Forward P/E | 10.8x | 6.1x | 4.9x | 7.4x |
| Total Debt | $5.86B | $6.56B | $6.36B | $22.96B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10.10B | $12.46B | $5.80B | $19.71B |
AMP vs EQH vs LNC vs PRU — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ameriprise Financia… (AMP) | 100 | 339.3 | +239.3% |
| Equitable Holdings,… (EQH) | 100 | 228.8 | +128.8% |
| Lincoln National Co… (LNC) | 100 | 99.2 | -0.8% |
| Prudential Financia… (PRU) | 100 | 164.3 | +64.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AMP vs EQH vs LNC vs PRU
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AMP carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 1.12, yield 6.6%
- 459.2% 10Y total return vs EQH's 145.0%
- Beta 1.12, yield 6.6%, current ratio 7.87x
- 18.8% margin vs EQH's -12.6%
EQH lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
LNC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Rev growth 53.6%, EPS growth 474.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.7%
- PEG 0.15 vs AMP's 0.44
- 53.6% revenue growth vs PRU's -14.0%
- Lower P/E (4.9x vs 6.1x)
PRU is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.97, Low D/E 64.5%, current ratio 0.61x
- Beta 0.97 vs EQH's 1.40, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 53.6% revenue growth vs PRU's -14.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (4.9x vs 6.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 18.8% margin vs EQH's -12.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.97 vs EQH's 1.40, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 6.6% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs EQH's 2.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +19.5% vs EQH's -10.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.9% ROA vs EQH's -0.5% |
AMP vs EQH vs LNC vs PRU — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
AMP vs EQH vs LNC vs PRU — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AMP leads in 2 of 6 categories
LNC leads 1 • EQH leads 0 • PRU leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — AMP and LNC each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PRU is the larger business by revenue, generating $61.8B annually — 5.6x EQH's $11.0B. AMP is the more profitable business, keeping 18.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to EQH's -12.6%. On growth, LNC holds the edge at +9.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $18.9B | $11.0B | $18.5B | $61.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $4.8B | -$494M | $2.8B | $5.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $3.6B | -$1.4B | $2.1B | $3.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $2.9B | $737M | -$178M | $9.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +50.4% | +59.2% | +26.0% | +30.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +25.5% | -10.9% | +13.7% | +8.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +18.8% | -12.6% | +11.4% | +5.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +15.3% | +6.7% | -1.0% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -9.5% | +9.4% | +6.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -1.0% | -74.6% | +164.4% | -12.8% |
Valuation Metrics
LNC leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 2.0x trailing earnings, LNC trades at a 84% valuation discount to AMP's 13.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), LNC offers better value at 0.06x vs AMP's 0.54x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $45.8B | $12.3B | $6.4B | $34.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $41.5B | $6.4B | $7.0B | $38.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.07x | -9.05x | 2.04x | 9.80x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.82x | 6.08x | 4.89x | 7.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.54x | — | 0.06x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.24x | — | 1.69x | 7.76x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.42x | 1.06x | 0.36x | 0.57x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.99x | 7.29x | 0.79x | 0.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 15.82x | 18.13x | — | 5.56x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AMP leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AMP delivers a 58.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $58 in annual profit, vs $-49 for EQH. PRU carries lower financial leverage with a 0.65x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to EQH's 3.67x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PRU scores 7/9 vs AMP's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +58.1% | -49.3% | +20.2% | +10.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.9% | -0.5% | +0.5% | +0.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +31.3% | — | +32.7% | +10.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.6% | -0.5% | +1.1% | +0.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.90x | 3.67x | 0.77x | 0.65x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$4.2B | -$5.9B | $554M | $3.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10.1B | $12.5B | $5.8B | $19.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.9B | $6.6B | $6.4B | $23.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 14.82x | -4.33x | 11.43x | 4.76x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — AMP and LNC each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AMP five years ago would be worth $19,129 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,787 for LNC. Over the past 12 months, LNC leads with a +19.5% total return vs EQH's -10.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LNC at 26.6% vs PRU's 12.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -3.1% | -8.3% | -14.4% | -10.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1.3% | -10.7% | +19.5% | +3.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +68.0% | +97.8% | +102.9% | +40.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +91.3% | +37.4% | -32.1% | +18.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +459.2% | +145.0% | +29.1% | +88.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +18.9% | +25.5% | +26.6% | +12.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — AMP and PRU each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PRU is the less volatile stock with a 0.97 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than EQH's 1.40 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AMP currently trades 86.4% from its 52-week high vs EQH's 77.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.12x | 1.40x | 1.34x | 0.97x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $550.18 | $56.61 | $46.82 | $119.76 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $422.37 | $35.20 | $31.61 | $91.89 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +86.4% | +77.2% | +80.4% | +83.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.6 | 66.9 | 57.7 | 58.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 621K | 4.0M | 2.1M | 2.3M |
Analyst Outlook
AMP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AMP as "Buy", EQH as "Buy", LNC as "Hold", PRU as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 35.3% upside for EQH (target: $59) vs 4.0% for PRU (target: $104). For income investors, AMP offers the higher dividend yield at 6.61% vs EQH's 2.41%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $525.80 | $59.14 | $43.50 | $104.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 22 | 21 | 28 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +6.6% | +2.4% | +4.7% | +5.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 15 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $31.41 | $1.05 | $1.77 | $5.50 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.6% | +22.9% | 0.0% | +2.9% |
AMP leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). LNC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
AMP vs EQH vs LNC vs PRU: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AMP or EQH or LNC or PRU a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is the stronger pick with 53.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -14. 0% for Prudential Financial, Inc. (PRU). Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) offers the better valuation at 2. 0x trailing P/E (4. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ameriprise Financial, Inc. (AMP) a "Buy" — based on 22 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 — AMP or EQH or LNC or PRU?
On trailing P/E, Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is the cheapest at 2.
0x versus Ameriprise Financial, Inc. at 13. 1x. On forward P/E, Lincoln National Corporation is actually cheaper at 4. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Lincoln National Corporation wins at 0. 15x versus Ameriprise Financial, Inc. 's 0. 44x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AMP or EQH or LNC or PRU?
Over the past 5 years, Ameriprise Financial, Inc.
(AMP) delivered a total return of +91. 3%, compared to -32. 1% for Lincoln National Corporation (LNC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AMP returned +459. 2% versus LNC's +29. 1%. 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 — AMP or EQH or LNC or PRU?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Prudential Financial, Inc.
(PRU) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 97β versus Equitable Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 40β — meaning EQH is approximately 44% more volatile than PRU relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Prudential Financial, Inc. (PRU) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 65% versus 4% for Equitable Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AMP or EQH or LNC or PRU?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is pulling ahead at 53.
6% versus -14. 0% for Prudential Financial, Inc. (PRU). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Lincoln National Corporation grew EPS 474. 2% year-over-year, compared to -227. 8% for Equitable Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PRU leads at 2. 2% 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 — AMP or EQH or LNC or PRU?
Ameriprise Financial, Inc.
(AMP) is the more profitable company, earning 18. 8% net margin versus -11. 8% for Equitable Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 18. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AMP leads at 25. 5% versus -10. 2% for EQH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EQH leads at 79. 1%, 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 AMP or EQH or LNC or PRU 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, Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 15x versus Ameriprise Financial, Inc. 's 0. 44x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) trades at 4. 9x forward P/E versus 10. 8x for Ameriprise Financial, Inc. — 5. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EQH: 35. 3% to $59. 14.
08Which pays a better dividend — AMP or EQH or LNC or PRU?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Ameriprise Financial, Inc. (AMP) offers the highest yield at 6. 6%, versus 2. 4% for Equitable Holdings, Inc. (EQH).
09Is AMP or EQH or LNC or PRU better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Ameriprise Financial, Inc.
(AMP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 12), 6. 6% yield, +459. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (AMP: +459. 2%, LNC: +29. 1%), 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 AMP and EQH and LNC and PRU?
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: AMP is a mid-cap deep-value stock; EQH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; LNC is a small-cap high-growth stock; PRU is a mid-cap deep-value stock. 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.