AMSF vs MMC

For growth investors, Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

(MMC) is the stronger pick with 7. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 6% for AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF). AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) offers the better valuation at 12. 3x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) 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, AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) is the cheapest at 12. 3x versus Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. at 21. 3x. On forward P/E, AMERISAFE, Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x.

Over the past 5 years, Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

(MMC) delivered a total return of +36. 5%, compared to -18. 9% for AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MMC returned +209. 8% versus AMSF's +31. 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), Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

(MMC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 14β versus AMERISAFE, Inc. 's 0. 23β — meaning AMSF is approximately 68% more volatile than MMC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 162% for Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

(MMC) is pulling ahead at 7. 6% versus 2. 6% for AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. grew EPS 8. 6% year-over-year, compared to -14. 5% for AMERISAFE, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MMC leads at 7. 3% 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.

Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

(MMC) is the more profitable company, earning 16. 6% net margin versus 14. 9% for AMERISAFE, Inc. — meaning it keeps 16. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MMC leads at 23. 8% versus 18. 6% for AMSF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AMSF leads at 46. 4%, 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, AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 16. 9x for Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. — 2. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AMSF: 46. 9% to $44. 50.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) offers the highest yield at 8. 4%, versus 1. 8% for Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (MMC).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

(MMC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 14), 1. 8% yield, +209. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MMC: +209. 8%, AMSF: +31. 8%), 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: AMSF is a small-cap deep-value stock; MMC is a mid-cap quality compounder 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.