NMR vs MUFG vs MS vs SMFG vs GS

For growth investors, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) is the stronger pick with 17. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR). Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) offers the better valuation at 10. 4x trailing P/E (9. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. (MUFG) a "Buy" — based on 2 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, Nomura Holdings, Inc.

(NMR) is the cheapest at 10. 4x versus Morgan Stanley at 23. 9x. On forward P/E, Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. is actually cheaper at 0. 1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. wins at 0. 00x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 80x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.

(MUFG) delivered a total return of +247. 8%, compared to +68. 5% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +732. 3% versus NMR's +141. 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), Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.

(MUFG) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 08β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 47β — meaning GS is approximately 36% more volatile than MUFG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Morgan Stanley (MS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) is pulling ahead at 17. 0% versus 5. 6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR). 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 Nomura Holdings, 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.

Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.

(MUFG) is the more profitable company, earning 15. 0% net margin versus 7. 6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MUFG leads at 20. 5% versus 11. 3% for NMR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MUFG leads at 56. 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.

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, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. (MUFG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 00x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 80x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. (SMFG) trades at 0. 1x forward P/E versus 16. 0x for Morgan Stanley — 15. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MS: 8. 2% to $205. 75.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) offers the highest yield at 4. 8%, versus 1. 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS).

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%, NMR: +141. 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: NMR is a mid-cap deep-value stock; MUFG is a large-cap deep-value stock; MS is a large-cap high-growth stock; SMFG is a mid-cap deep-value stock; GS is a large-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.