Asset Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BCG vs APAM vs NTRS vs BK vs STT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management
BCG vs APAM vs NTRS vs BK vs STT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $36M | $2.68B | $29.73B | $89.81B | $42.19B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $164M | $1.20B | $14.30B | $39.55B | $21.97B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1M | $290M | $1.74B | $5.24B | $2.98B |
| Gross Margin | 7.2% | 45.7% | 56.5% | 46.0% | 58.5% |
| Operating Margin | 0.9% | 33.4% | 16.3% | 14.8% | 15.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | 9.9x | 14.8x | 14.9x | 12.0x |
| Total Debt | $29M | $410M | $16.43B | $45.44B | $36.79B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $7M | $256M | $61.13B | $101.94B | $116.10B |
BCG vs APAM vs NTRS vs BK vs STT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binah Capital Group… (BCG) | 100 | 16.9 | -83.1% |
| Artisan Partners As… (APAM) | 100 | 83.1 | -16.9% |
| Northern Trust Corp… (NTRS) | 100 | 180.4 | +80.4% |
| The Bank of New Yor… (BK) | 100 | 226.5 | +126.5% |
| State Street Corpor… (STT) | 100 | 193.3 | +93.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BCG vs APAM vs NTRS vs BK vs STT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BCG has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in quality and efficiency.
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs STT's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs STT's 0.4%
APAM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.15, yield 10.3%
- Beta 1.15, yield 10.3%, current ratio 20.33x
- 10.3% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs BK's 1.4%
NTRS is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 1.4% vs APAM's 0.2%
- +62.9% vs BCG's +1.4%
BK is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 266.6% 10Y total return vs STT's 187.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.83, current ratio 0.65x
- Beta 0.83 vs BCG's 1.29, lower leverage
STT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Rev growth 19.6%, EPS growth 47.1%
- PEG 1.37 vs BK's 2.89
- 19.6% NII/revenue growth vs NTRS's -9.9%
- Lower P/E (12.0x vs 14.9x), PEG 1.37 vs 2.89
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.6% NII/revenue growth vs NTRS's -9.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.0x vs 14.9x), PEG 1.37 vs 2.89 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs STT's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.83 vs BCG's 1.29, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 10.3% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs BK's 1.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +62.9% vs BCG's +1.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs STT's 0.4% |
BCG vs APAM vs NTRS vs BK vs STT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BCG vs APAM vs NTRS vs BK vs STT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
APAM leads in 2 of 6 categories
BK leads 1 • BCG leads 0 • NTRS leads 0 • STT leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
APAM leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BK is the larger business by revenue, generating $39.6B annually — 240.6x BCG's $164M. APAM is the more profitable business, keeping 24.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BCG's -3.2%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $164M | $1.2B | $14.3B | $39.6B | $22.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $6M | $424M | $3.2B | $8.4B | $4.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1M | $290M | $1.7B | $5.2B | $3.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $4M | $172M | $4.7B | $1.6B | -$6.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +7.2% | +45.7% | +56.5% | +46.0% | +58.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +0.9% | +33.4% | +16.3% | +14.8% | +15.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.2% | +24.3% | +12.1% | +11.5% | +12.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -0.4% | +14.3% | +38.2% | -2.0% | -64.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.2% | +35.6% | +7.1% | +25.3% | +23.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — BCG and NTRS and STT each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.4x trailing earnings, APAM trades at a 58% valuation discount to BK's 22.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NTRS offers better value at 1.86x vs BK's 4.36x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $36M | $2.7B | $29.7B | $89.8B | $42.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $58M | $2.8B | -$15.0B | $33.3B | -$37.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -6.84x | 9.39x | 18.35x | 22.50x | 18.21x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 9.94x | 14.84x | 14.93x | 12.05x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.64x | 1.86x | 4.36x | 2.06x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 23.06x | 6.94x | -4.66x | 4.36x | -9.28x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.22x | 2.24x | 2.08x | 2.27x | 1.92x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 29.52x | 3.19x | 2.33x | 2.34x | 1.78x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 15.65x | 5.45x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
APAM leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
APAM delivers a 44.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $45 in annual profit, vs $6 for BCG. APAM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.52x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BCG's 23.41x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NTRS scores 6/9 vs STT's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.8% | +44.9% | +13.4% | +11.8% | +10.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.5% | +19.4% | +1.0% | +1.2% | +0.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.9% | +26.7% | +6.0% | +5.0% | +4.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.2% | +29.9% | +9.0% | +6.5% | +4.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 23.41x | 0.52x | 1.27x | 1.09x | 1.45x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $21M | $155M | -$44.7B | -$56.5B | -$79.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $7M | $256M | $61.1B | $101.9B | $116.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $29M | $410M | $16.4B | $45.4B | $36.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.12x | 58.20x | 0.38x | 0.32x | 0.42x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BK leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BK five years ago would be worth $26,597 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,305 for BCG. Over the past 12 months, NTRS leads with a +62.9% total return vs BCG's +1.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BK at 48.6% vs BCG's -38.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -20.1% | -4.4% | +15.7% | +12.4% | +17.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1.4% | +1.8% | +62.9% | +55.1% | +62.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -76.9% | +47.7% | +132.2% | +228.1% | +129.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -76.9% | -1.2% | +45.9% | +166.0% | +85.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -76.9% | +127.4% | +170.8% | +266.6% | +187.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -38.7% | +13.9% | +32.4% | +48.6% | +31.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BK and STT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BK is the less volatile stock with a 0.83 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BCG's 1.29 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. STT currently trades 95.7% from its 52-week high vs BCG's 63.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.29x | 1.15x | 1.13x | 0.83x | 1.19x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.44 | $48.50 | $173.19 | $139.15 | $156.18 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.36 | $34.99 | $98.50 | $84.54 | $92.23 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +63.7% | +78.4% | +92.6% | +93.8% | +95.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 52.3 | 51.1 | 53.3 | 51.3 | 58.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 708K | 752K | 1.1M | 3.3M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — APAM and BK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: APAM as "Hold", NTRS as "Hold", BK as "Buy", STT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 7.3% upside for STT (target: $160) vs -4.2% for NTRS (target: $154). For income investors, APAM offers the higher dividend yield at 10.31% vs BCG's 0.23%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $40.00 | $153.75 | $139.86 | $160.44 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 15 | 35 | 35 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.2% | +10.3% | +2.0% | +1.4% | +2.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 2 | 1 | 14 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.01 | $3.92 | $3.14 | $1.80 | $3.42 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.3% | +3.4% | +6.9% |
APAM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). BK leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
BCG vs APAM vs NTRS vs BK vs STT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BCG or APAM or NTRS or BK or STT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, State Street Corporation (STT) is the stronger pick with 19.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 9% for Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS). Artisan Partners Asset Management Inc. (APAM) offers the better valuation at 9. 4x trailing P/E (9. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (BK) a "Buy" — based on 35 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 — BCG or APAM or NTRS or BK or STT?
On trailing P/E, Artisan Partners Asset Management Inc.
(APAM) is the cheapest at 9. 4x versus The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation at 22. 5x. On forward P/E, Artisan Partners Asset Management Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: State Street Corporation wins at 1. 37x versus The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation's 2. 89x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BCG or APAM or NTRS or BK or STT?
Over the past 5 years, The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (BK) delivered a total return of +166.
0%, compared to -76. 9% for Binah Capital Group, Inc. (BCG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BK returned +266. 6% versus BCG's -76. 9%. 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 — BCG or APAM or NTRS or BK or STT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (BK) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
83β versus Binah Capital Group, Inc. 's 1. 29β — meaning BCG is approximately 56% more volatile than BK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Artisan Partners Asset Management Inc. (APAM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 52% versus 23% for Binah Capital Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BCG or APAM or NTRS or BK or STT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), State Street Corporation (STT) is pulling ahead at 19.
6% versus -9. 9% for Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation grew EPS 49. 1% year-over-year, compared to -1004. 0% for Binah Capital Group, 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.
06Which has better profit margins — BCG or APAM or NTRS or BK or STT?
Artisan Partners Asset Management Inc.
(APAM) is the more profitable company, earning 24. 3% net margin versus -3. 2% for Binah Capital Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 24. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: APAM leads at 33. 4% versus 0. 9% for BCG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — STT leads at 58. 5%, 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 BCG or APAM or NTRS or BK or STT 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, State Street Corporation (STT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 37x versus The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation's 2. 89x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Artisan Partners Asset Management Inc. (APAM) trades at 9. 9x forward P/E versus 14. 9x for The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation — 5. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for STT: 7. 3% to $160. 44.
08Which pays a better dividend — BCG or APAM or NTRS or BK or STT?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Artisan Partners Asset Management Inc. (APAM) offers the highest yield at 10. 3%, versus 0. 2% for Binah Capital Group, Inc. (BCG).
09Is BCG or APAM or NTRS or BK or STT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (BK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
83), 1. 4% yield, +266. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (BK: +266. 6%, BCG: -76. 9%), 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 BCG and APAM and NTRS and BK and STT?
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: BCG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; APAM is a small-cap deep-value stock; NTRS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; BK is a mid-cap high-growth stock; STT is a mid-cap high-growth stock. APAM, NTRS, BK, STT pay a dividend while BCG 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.
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.