Insurance - Diversified
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
EQH vs LNC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Insurance - Life
EQH vs LNC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Diversified | Insurance - Life |
| Market Cap | $12.31B | $6.41B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $10.99B | $18.46B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1.38B | $2.11B |
| Gross Margin | 59.2% | 26.0% |
| Operating Margin | -10.9% | 13.7% |
| Forward P/E | 6.1x | 4.9x |
| Total Debt | $6.56B | $6.36B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $12.46B | $5.80B |
EQH vs LNC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Equitable Holdings,… (EQH) | 100 | 228.8 | +128.8% |
| Lincoln National Co… (LNC) | 100 | 99.2 | -0.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EQH vs LNC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EQH is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 145.0% 10Y total return vs LNC's 29.1%
- 2.4% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs LNC's 4.7%
LNC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 1.34, yield 4.7%
- Rev growth 53.6%, EPS growth 474.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.34, Low D/E 76.9%, current ratio 3.22x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 53.6% revenue growth vs EQH's -6.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (4.9x vs 6.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Combined ratio 0.8 vs EQH's 1.1 (lower = better underwriting) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.34 vs EQH's 1.40, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.4% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs LNC's 4.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +19.5% vs EQH's -10.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 0.5% ROA vs EQH's -0.5% |
EQH vs LNC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
EQH vs LNC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LNC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LNC is the larger business by revenue, generating $18.5B annually — 1.7x EQH's $11.0B. LNC is the more profitable business, keeping 11.4% 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 | $11.0B | $18.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$494M | $2.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1.4B | $2.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $737M | -$178M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +59.2% | +26.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -10.9% | +13.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -12.6% | +11.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +6.7% | -1.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -9.5% | +9.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -74.6% | +164.4% |
Valuation Metrics
LNC leads this category, winning 3 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $12.3B | $6.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.4B | $7.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -9.05x | 2.04x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 6.08x | 4.89x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.06x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 1.69x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.06x | 0.36x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.29x | 0.79x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 18.13x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
LNC leads this category, winning 7 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LNC delivers a 20.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $-49 for EQH. LNC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.77x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to EQH's 3.67x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LNC scores 6/9 vs EQH's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -49.3% | +20.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.5% | +0.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +32.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.5% | +1.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.67x | 0.77x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5.9B | $554M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $12.5B | $5.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6.6B | $6.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -4.33x | 11.43x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — EQH and LNC each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in EQH five years ago would be worth $13,736 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 EQH's 25.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -8.3% | -14.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -10.7% | +19.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +97.8% | +102.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +37.4% | -32.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +145.0% | +29.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +25.5% | +26.6% |
Risk & Volatility
LNC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LNC is the less volatile stock with a 1.34 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. LNC currently trades 80.4% 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 | 1.40x | 1.34x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $56.61 | $46.82 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $35.20 | $31.61 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +77.2% | +80.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.9 | 57.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.0M | 2.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — EQH and LNC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates EQH as "Buy" and LNC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 35.3% upside for EQH (target: $59) vs 15.6% for LNC (target: $44). For income investors, LNC offers the higher dividend yield at 4.70% vs EQH's 2.41%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $59.14 | $43.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 21 | 28 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.4% | +4.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 8 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.05 | $1.77 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +22.9% | 0.0% |
LNC leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics. 2 categories are tied.
EQH vs LNC: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EQH or LNC 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 -6. 2% for Equitable Holdings, Inc. (EQH). 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 Equitable Holdings, Inc. (EQH) a "Buy" — based on 21 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 — EQH or LNC?
On forward P/E, Lincoln National Corporation is actually cheaper at 4.
9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EQH or LNC?
Over the past 5 years, Equitable Holdings, Inc.
(EQH) delivered a total return of +37. 4%, compared to -32. 1% for Lincoln National Corporation (LNC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EQH returned +145. 0% 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 — EQH or LNC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
34β versus Equitable Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 40β — meaning EQH is approximately 5% more volatile than LNC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 77% versus 4% for Equitable Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EQH or LNC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is pulling ahead at 53.
6% versus -6. 2% for Equitable Holdings, Inc. (EQH). 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, LNC leads at 0. 7% 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 — EQH or LNC?
Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is the more profitable company, earning 18.
2% net margin versus -11. 8% for Equitable Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 18. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LNC leads at 22. 4% 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 EQH or LNC more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) trades at 4.
9x forward P/E versus 6. 1x for Equitable Holdings, Inc. — 1. 2x 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 — EQH or LNC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) offers the highest yield at 4. 7%, versus 2. 4% for Equitable Holdings, Inc. (EQH).
09Is EQH or LNC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Equitable Holdings, Inc.
(EQH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (2. 4% yield, +145. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (EQH: +145. 0%, 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 EQH and LNC?
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: EQH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; LNC is a small-cap high-growth 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.