Insurance - Specialty
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MBI vs BAM vs MS vs GS vs BX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Asset Management
MBI vs BAM vs MS vs GS vs BX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Specialty | Asset Management | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $325M | $81.87B | $302.59B | $287.62B | $95.85B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $90M | $3.98B | $103.14B | $126.85B | $13.83B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-155M | $2.60B | $16.18B | $16.67B | $3.02B |
| Gross Margin | 16.7% | 71.0% | 55.6% | 41.1% | 86.0% |
| Operating Margin | -177.8% | 69.4% | 17.1% | 14.5% | 51.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 26.4x | 16.0x | 15.6x | 20.5x |
| Total Debt | $2.84B | $219M | $360.49B | $616.93B | $13.31B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $69M | $12M | $75.74B | $182.09B | $2.63B |
MBI vs BAM vs MS vs GS vs BX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| MBIA Inc. (MBI) | 100 | 49.7 | -50.3% |
| Brookfield Asset Ma… (BAM) | 100 | 170.1 | +70.1% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 223.7 | +123.7% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 269.6 | +169.6% |
| Blackstone Inc. (BX) | 100 | 164.9 | +64.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MBI vs BAM vs MS vs GS vs BX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MBI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Rev growth 90.5%, EPS growth 61.9%, 3Y rev CAGR -19.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.81, current ratio 7.16x
- Beta 0.81, current ratio 7.16x
- 90.5% revenue growth vs BAM's -2.0%
BAM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for quality and efficiency.
- 54.5% margin vs MBI's -172.2%
- 15.8% ROA vs MBI's -7.6%, ROIC 71.0% vs -16.9%
MS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 1.37, yield 2.0%
- 7.3% 10Y total return vs GS's 5.3%
- NIM 0.7% vs GS's 0.5%
GS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and dividends.
- Lower P/E (15.6x vs 16.0x), PEG 1.12 vs 1.80
- 1.5% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs BX's 6.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +70.6% vs BAM's -9.3%
BX is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.98 vs MS's 1.80
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 90.5% revenue growth vs BAM's -2.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.6x vs 16.0x), PEG 1.12 vs 1.80 | |
| Quality / Margins | 54.5% margin vs MBI's -172.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.81 vs BX's 1.53 | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs BX's 6.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.6% vs BAM's -9.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 15.8% ROA vs MBI's -7.6%, ROIC 71.0% vs -16.9% |
MBI vs BAM vs MS vs GS vs BX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
MBI vs BAM vs MS vs GS vs BX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BAM leads in 2 of 6 categories
GS leads 2 • MBI leads 0 • MS leads 0 • BX leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BAM leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GS is the larger business by revenue, generating $126.9B annually — 1409.5x MBI's $90M. BAM is the more profitable business, keeping 54.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MBI's -172.2%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $90M | $4.0B | $103.1B | $126.9B | $13.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$13M | $3.0B | $26.3B | $23.4B | $7.2B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$155M | $2.6B | $16.2B | $16.7B | $3.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $48M | $1.9B | -$6.7B | $15.8B | $3.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +16.7% | +71.0% | +55.6% | +41.1% | +86.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -177.8% | +69.4% | +17.1% | +14.5% | +51.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -172.2% | +54.5% | +13.0% | +11.3% | +21.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +53.3% | +15.8% | -2.0% | -12.1% | +12.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +71.4% | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +38.3% | +44.8% | +48.9% | +45.8% | +41.3% |
Valuation Metrics
GS leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 22.8x trailing earnings, GS trades at a 40% valuation discount to BAM's 38.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BX offers better value at 1.51x vs MS's 2.69x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $325M | $81.9B | $302.6B | $287.6B | $95.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.1B | $82.1B | $587.3B | $722.5B | $106.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.78x | 38.11x | 23.92x | 22.84x | 31.53x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 26.39x | 16.01x | 15.64x | 20.50x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.69x | 1.63x | 1.51x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 193.72x | 29.57x | 25.81x | 34.75x | 14.77x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.07x | 20.57x | 2.93x | 2.27x | 6.93x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 24.98x | 2.91x | 2.53x | 4.37x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.56x | 130.58x | — | — | 54.93x |
Profitability & Efficiency
BAM leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BAM delivers a 24.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $24 in annual profit, vs $13 for GS. BAM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 5.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MBI scores 7/9 vs GS's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +24.4% | +14.6% | +12.6% | +14.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.6% | +15.8% | +1.2% | +0.9% | +6.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -16.9% | +71.0% | +2.9% | +1.9% | +16.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -9.4% | +103.0% | +3.8% | +3.6% | +16.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.07x | 3.42x | 5.06x | 0.61x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.8B | $207M | $284.7B | $434.8B | $10.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $69M | $12M | $75.7B | $182.1B | $2.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.8B | $219M | $360.5B | $616.9B | $13.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.11x | 9.00x | 0.44x | 0.31x | 14.12x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $26,440 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $15,900 for BX. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +70.6% total return vs BAM's -9.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 43.5% vs BAM's 17.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -7.7% | -7.8% | +5.7% | +1.8% | -21.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +37.7% | -9.3% | +63.0% | +70.6% | -6.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +136.7% | +62.4% | +138.4% | +195.2% | +65.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +125.3% | +68.2% | +136.2% | +164.4% | +59.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +197.3% | +68.2% | +732.3% | +534.3% | +476.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +33.3% | +17.5% | +33.6% | +43.5% | +18.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MBI and MS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MBI is the less volatile stock with a 0.81 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BX's 1.53 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MS currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs BX's 64.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.81x | 1.50x | 1.37x | 1.47x | 1.53x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $8.26 | $64.10 | $194.83 | $984.70 | $190.09 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $4.11 | $42.20 | $118.20 | $547.74 | $101.73 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +77.4% | +76.1% | +97.6% | +94.0% | +64.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.9 | 59.6 | 66.0 | 59.5 | 54.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 309K | 3.6M | 5.4M | 2.0M | 7.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — GS and BX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MBI as "Buy", BAM as "Buy", MS as "Buy", GS as "Hold", BX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 119.1% upside for MBI (target: $14) vs 7.6% for GS (target: $996). For income investors, BX offers the higher dividend yield at 6.30% vs BAM's 0.77%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $14.00 | $61.83 | $205.75 | $995.89 | $156.29 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 6 | 20 | 52 | 55 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.8% | +2.0% | +1.5% | +6.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 1 | 11 | 12 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.38 | $3.81 | $13.48 | $7.70 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.2% | +0.0% | +1.4% | +3.5% | +0.3% |
BAM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). GS leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 2 tied.
MBI vs BAM vs MS vs GS vs BX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MBI or BAM or MS or GS or BX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MBIA Inc.
(MBI) is the stronger pick with 90. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 0% for Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. (BAM). The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) offers the better valuation at 22. 8x trailing P/E (15. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MBIA Inc. (MBI) 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.
02Which has the better valuation — MBI or BAM or MS or GS or BX?
On trailing P/E, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is the cheapest at 22. 8x versus Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. at 38. 1x. On forward P/E, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Blackstone Inc. wins at 0. 98x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 80x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MBI or BAM or MS or GS or BX?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) delivered a total return of +164. 4%, compared to +59. 0% for Blackstone Inc. (BX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +732. 3% versus BAM's +68. 2%. 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 — MBI or BAM or MS or GS or BX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MBIA Inc.
(MBI) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 81β versus Blackstone Inc. 's 1. 53β — meaning BX is approximately 88% more volatile than MBI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. (BAM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MBI or BAM or MS or GS or BX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MBIA Inc.
(MBI) is pulling ahead at 90. 5% versus -2. 0% for Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. (BAM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to 7. 2% for Blackstone 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 — MBI or BAM or MS or GS or BX?
Brookfield Asset Management Ltd.
(BAM) is the more profitable company, earning 54. 5% net margin versus -221. 3% for MBIA Inc. — meaning it keeps 54. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BAM leads at 69. 4% versus -226. 3% for MBI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BX leads at 86. 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.
07Is MBI or BAM or MS or GS or BX 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, Blackstone Inc. (BX) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 98x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 80x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) trades at 15. 6x forward P/E versus 26. 4x for Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. — 10. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MBI: 119. 1% to $14. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — MBI or BAM or MS or GS or BX?
In this comparison, BX (6.
3% yield), MS (2. 0% yield), GS (1. 5% yield), BAM (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. MBI does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MBI or BAM or MS or GS or BX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (2.
0% yield, +732. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MS: +732. 3%, BAM: +68. 2%), 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 MBI and BAM and MS and GS and BX?
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: MBI is a small-cap high-growth stock; BAM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MS is a large-cap high-growth stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth stock; BX is a mid-cap high-growth stock. BAM, MS, GS, BX pay a dividend while MBI 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.