GL vs GNW vs CNO vs LNC

For growth investors, Globe Life Inc.

(GL) is the stronger pick with 3. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -10. 9% for Genworth Financial, Inc. (GNW). Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) offers the better valuation at 6. 2x trailing P/E (4. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Globe Life Inc. (GL) a "Hold" — based on 28 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, Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is the cheapest at 6.

2x versus CNO Financial Group, Inc. at 19. 5x. On forward P/E, Lincoln National Corporation is actually cheaper at 4. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Lincoln National Corporation wins at 0. 14x versus CNO Financial Group, Inc. 's 4. 80x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Genworth Financial, Inc.

(GNW) delivered a total return of +111. 1%, compared to -35. 2% for Lincoln National Corporation (LNC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GL returned +175. 7% versus LNC's +24. 5%. 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), Globe Life Inc.

(GL) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 48β versus Lincoln National Corporation's 1. 34β — meaning LNC is approximately 178% more volatile than GL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Genworth Financial, Inc. (GNW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 15% versus 154% for CNO Financial Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Globe Life Inc.

(GL) is pulling ahead at 3. 8% versus -10. 9% for Genworth Financial, Inc. (GNW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Globe Life Inc. grew EPS 17. 8% year-over-year, compared to -68. 3% for Lincoln National Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, CNO leads at 7. 9% 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.

Globe Life Inc.

(GL) is the more profitable company, earning 19. 4% net margin versus 3. 5% for Genworth Financial, Inc. — meaning it keeps 19. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GL leads at 24. 4% versus 6. 5% for CNO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LNC leads at 57. 3%, 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, Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 14x versus CNO Financial Group, Inc. 's 4. 80x. 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. 7x forward P/E versus 21. 3x for Genworth Financial, Inc. — 16. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LNC: 21. 0% to $43. 50.

In this comparison, LNC (4.

9% yield), CNO (1. 5% yield), GL (0. 7% yield) pay a dividend. GNW does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Globe Life Inc.

(GL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 48), 0. 7% yield, +175. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GL: +175. 7%, LNC: +24. 5%), 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: GL is a mid-cap deep-value stock; GNW is a small-cap deep-value stock; CNO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LNC is a small-cap deep-value stock. GL, CNO, LNC pay a dividend while GNW 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.