Compare Stocks

4 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

LNC vs PRU vs MET vs UNM

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
LNC
Lincoln National Corporation

Insurance - Life

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$6.41B
5Y Perf.-0.8%
PRU
Prudential Financial, Inc.

Insurance - Life

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$34.86B
5Y Perf.+64.3%
MET
MetLife, Inc.

Insurance - Life

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$52.27B
5Y Perf.+122.6%
UNM
Unum Group

Insurance - Life

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$12.96B
5Y Perf.+429.8%

LNC vs PRU vs MET vs UNM — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
LNC logoLNC
PRU logoPRU
MET logoMET
UNM logoUNM
IndustryInsurance - LifeInsurance - LifeInsurance - LifeInsurance - Life
Market Cap$6.41B$34.86B$52.27B$12.96B
Revenue (TTM)$18.46B$61.82B$76.13B$13.30B
Net Income (TTM)$2.11B$3.48B$3.38B$781M
Gross Margin26.0%30.8%25.6%33.9%
Operating Margin13.7%8.2%6.1%7.5%
Forward P/E4.9x7.4x8.2x9.2x
Total Debt$6.36B$22.96B$20.18B$3.90B
Cash & Equiv.$5.80B$19.71B$22.03B$158M

LNC vs PRU vs MET vs UNMLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

LNC
PRU
MET
UNM
StockMay 20May 26Return
Lincoln National Co… (LNC)10099.2-0.8%
Prudential Financia… (PRU)100164.3+64.3%
MetLife, Inc. (MET)100222.6+122.6%
Unum Group (UNM)100529.8+429.8%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: LNC vs PRU vs MET vs UNM

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: LNC leads in 4 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and valuation and capital efficiency. Unum Group is the stronger pick specifically for capital preservation and lower volatility and operational efficiency and capital deployment. PRU also leads in specific categories worth noting. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
LNC
Lincoln National Corporation
The Insurance Pick

LNC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and valuation efficiency.

  • Rev growth 53.6%, EPS growth 474.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.7%
  • PEG 0.15 vs UNM's 4.76
  • 53.6% revenue growth vs PRU's -14.0%
  • Lower P/E (4.9x vs 9.2x), PEG 0.15 vs 4.76
Best for: growth exposure and valuation efficiency
PRU
Prudential Financial, Inc.
The Insurance Pick

PRU is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.

  • Dividend streak 8 yrs, beta 0.97, yield 5.5%
  • Beta 0.97, yield 5.5%, current ratio 0.61x
  • 5.5% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs UNM's 2.2%
Best for: income & stability and defensive
MET
MetLife, Inc.
The Insurance Play

MET lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.

Best for: financial services exposure
UNM
Unum Group
The Insurance Pick

UNM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.

  • 175.7% 10Y total return vs MET's 156.8%
  • Lower volatility, beta 0.48, Low D/E 35.1%
  • Beta 0.48 vs LNC's 1.34, lower leverage
  • 1.6% ROA vs MET's 0.5%, ROIC 4.7% vs 13.1%
Best for: long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthLNC logoLNC53.6% revenue growth vs PRU's -14.0%
ValueLNC logoLNCLower P/E (4.9x vs 9.2x), PEG 0.15 vs 4.76
Quality / MarginsLNC logoLNCCombined ratio 0.8 vs MET's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting)
Stability / SafetyUNM logoUNMBeta 0.48 vs LNC's 1.34, lower leverage
DividendsPRU logoPRU5.5% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs UNM's 2.2%
Momentum (1Y)LNC logoLNC+19.5% vs UNM's +3.3%
Efficiency (ROA)UNM logoUNM1.6% ROA vs MET's 0.5%, ROIC 4.7% vs 13.1%

LNC vs PRU vs MET vs UNM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

LNCLincoln National Corporation
FY 2024
Life Segment
34.5%$6.3B
Group Protection Segment
31.4%$5.7B
Annuities Segment
26.9%$4.9B
Retirement Plan Services Segment
7.2%$1.3B
PRUPrudential Financial, Inc.
FY 2025
Retirement
56.3%$16.7B
Group Insurance
22.9%$6.8B
Individual Life
20.7%$6.1B
METMetLife, Inc.
FY 2025
Prepaid legal plans and administrative-only contracts
26.1%$637M
Vision fee for service arrangements
23.0%$561M
Other revenue from service contracts from customers
17.7%$432M
Fee-based investment management services
15.1%$369M
Administrative Service
12.1%$295M
Distribution Service
5.8%$142M
UNMUnum Group
FY 2025
Unum US
60.7%$7.9B
Colonial Life
15.4%$2.0B
Closed Block
14.5%$1.9B
Unum International
9.5%$1.2B

LNC vs PRU vs MET vs UNM — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLLNCLAGGINGMET

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

LNC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

MET is the larger business by revenue, generating $76.1B annually — 5.7x UNM's $13.3B. LNC is the more profitable business, keeping 11.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MET's 4.4%. On growth, MET holds the edge at +29.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricLNC logoLNCLincoln National …PRU logoPRUPrudential Financ…MET logoMETMetLife, Inc.UNM logoUNMUnum Group
RevenueTrailing 12 months$18.5B$61.8B$76.1B$13.3B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$2.8B$5.4B$5.7B$1.1B
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$2.1B$3.5B$3.4B$781M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex-$178M$9.8B$18.1B$539M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+26.0%+30.8%+25.6%+33.9%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+13.7%+8.2%+6.1%+7.5%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+11.4%+5.6%+4.4%+5.9%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue-1.0%+15.8%+23.8%+4.1%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+9.4%+6.3%+29.1%+9.0%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+164.4%-12.8%-34.3%+33.0%
LNC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

LNC leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 2.0x trailing earnings, LNC trades at a 89% valuation discount to UNM's 18.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), LNC offers better value at 0.06x vs UNM's 9.72x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricLNC logoLNCLincoln National …PRU logoPRUPrudential Financ…MET logoMETMetLife, Inc.UNM logoUNMUnum Group
Market CapShares × price$6.4B$34.9B$52.3B$13.0B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$7.0B$38.1B$50.4B$16.7B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS2.04x9.80x16.70x18.75x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.4.89x7.40x8.19x9.17x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate0.06x9.72x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple1.69x7.76x8.81x15.81x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue0.36x0.57x0.68x0.99x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share0.79x0.98x1.84x1.25x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF5.56x2.89x23.34x
LNC leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

UNM leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

LNC delivers a 20.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $7 for UNM. UNM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.35x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LNC's 0.77x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MET scores 8/9 vs UNM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricLNC logoLNCLincoln National …PRU logoPRUPrudential Financ…MET logoMETMetLife, Inc.UNM logoUNMUnum Group
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+20.2%+10.3%+11.9%+7.1%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+0.5%+0.6%+0.5%+1.6%
ROICReturn on invested capital+32.7%+10.0%+13.1%+4.7%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+1.1%+0.9%+1.0%+1.5%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–96785
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage0.77x0.65x0.70x0.35x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$554M$3.2B-$1.8B$3.7B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$5.8B$19.7B$22.0B$158M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$6.4B$23.0B$20.2B$3.9B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense11.43x4.76x5.39x5.48x
UNM leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

Evenly matched — LNC and UNM each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in UNM five years ago would be worth $29,208 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,787 for LNC. Over the past 12 months, LNC leads with a +19.5% total return vs UNM's +3.3%. 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.

MetricLNC logoLNCLincoln National …PRU logoPRUPrudential Financ…MET logoMETMetLife, Inc.UNM logoUNMUnum Group
YTD ReturnYear-to-date-14.4%-10.8%+0.5%+5.1%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+19.5%+3.7%+7.9%+3.3%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+102.9%+40.4%+61.5%+90.4%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-32.1%+18.7%+35.3%+192.1%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+29.1%+88.9%+156.8%+175.7%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+26.6%+12.0%+17.3%+23.9%
Evenly matched — LNC and UNM each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

UNM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

UNM is the less volatile stock with a 0.48 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LNC's 1.34 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. UNM currently trades 96.6% from its 52-week high vs LNC's 80.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricLNC logoLNCLincoln National …PRU logoPRUPrudential Financ…MET logoMETMetLife, Inc.UNM logoUNMUnum Group
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5001.34x0.97x1.09x0.48x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$46.82$119.76$83.64$83.13
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$31.61$91.89$67.33$68.28
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+80.4%+83.6%+95.8%+96.6%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10057.758.566.364.3
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded2.1M2.3M3.5M1.5M
UNM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Evenly matched — PRU and UNM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: LNC as "Hold", PRU as "Hold", MET as "Buy", UNM as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 22.1% upside for UNM (target: $98) vs 4.0% for PRU (target: $104). For income investors, PRU offers the higher dividend yield at 5.50% vs UNM's 2.21%.

MetricLNC logoLNCLincoln National …PRU logoPRUPrudential Financ…MET logoMETMetLife, Inc.UNM logoUNMUnum Group
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellHoldHoldBuyHold
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$43.50$104.13$96.50$98.00
# AnalystsCovering analysts28373330
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+4.7%+5.5%+2.8%+2.2%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises081320
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$1.77$5.50$2.27$1.77
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap0.0%+2.9%+7.4%+7.8%
Evenly matched — PRU and UNM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

LNC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). UNM leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Risk & Volatility). 2 tied.

Best OverallLincoln National Corporation (LNC)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

LNC vs PRU vs MET vs UNM: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is LNC or PRU or MET or UNM 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 MetLife, Inc. (MET) a "Buy" — based on 33 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — LNC or PRU or MET or UNM?

On trailing P/E, Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is the cheapest at 2.

0x versus Unum Group at 18. 8x. 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 Unum Group's 4. 76x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — LNC or PRU or MET or UNM?

Over the past 5 years, Unum Group (UNM) delivered a total return of +192.

1%, compared to -32. 1% for Lincoln National Corporation (LNC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UNM returned +175. 7% 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.

04

Which is safer — LNC or PRU or MET or UNM?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Unum Group (UNM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

48β versus Lincoln National Corporation's 1. 34β — meaning LNC is approximately 179% more volatile than UNM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Unum Group (UNM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 35% versus 77% for Lincoln National Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — LNC or PRU or MET or UNM?

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 -54. 8% for Unum Group. Over a 3-year CAGR, MET leads at 4. 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — LNC or PRU or MET or UNM?

Lincoln National Corporation (LNC) is the more profitable company, earning 18.

2% net margin versus 4. 4% for MetLife, 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 6. 0% for MET. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PRU leads at 42. 0%, 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.

07

Is LNC or PRU or MET or UNM 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 Unum Group's 4. 76x. 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 9. 2x for Unum Group — 4. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UNM: 22. 1% to $98. 00.

08

Which pays a better dividend — LNC or PRU or MET or UNM?

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Prudential Financial, Inc. (PRU) offers the highest yield at 5. 5%, versus 2. 2% for Unum Group (UNM).

09

Is LNC or PRU or MET or UNM better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, Unum Group (UNM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

48), 2. 2% yield, +175. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UNM: +175. 7%, 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.

10

What are the main differences between LNC and PRU and MET and UNM?

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: LNC is a small-cap high-growth stock; PRU is a mid-cap deep-value stock; MET is a mid-cap deep-value stock; UNM 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.

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.

Stocks Like

LNC

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 6%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

PRU

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 5%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

MET

High-Growth Disruptor

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 14%
  • Gross Margin > 15%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

UNM

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 5%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform LNC and PRU and MET and UNM on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(LNC: 9.4% · PRU: 6.3%)
Net Margin>
%
(LNC: 11.4% · PRU: 5.6%)
P/E Ratio<
x
(LNC: 2.0x · PRU: 9.8x)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.