PRS
Prudential Financial, Inc. 5.62
Insurance - Life
Market Cap$7.97B
5Y Perf.-14.5%
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Try these comparisons:
Stock Comparison
PRS vs UNM vs MET vs PRU
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
UNM
Unum Group
Insurance - Life
Market Cap$12.97B
5Y Perf.+430.1%
MET
MetLife, Inc.
Insurance - Life
Market Cap$51.39B
5Y Perf.+118.9%
PRU
Prudential Financial, Inc.
Insurance - Life
Market Cap$34.58B
5Y Perf.+63.1%
PRS vs UNM vs MET vs PRU — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | PRS | UNM | MET | PRU |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Insurance - Life | Insurance - Life | Insurance - Life | Insurance - Life |
| Market Cap | $7.97B | $12.97B | $51.39B | $34.58B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $62.83B | $13.30B | $76.94B | $61.82B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $3.47B | $781M | $3.62B | $3.48B |
| Gross Margin | 32.2% | 33.9% | 28.4% | 30.8% |
| Operating Margin | 6.1% | 7.5% | 6.3% | 8.2% |
| Forward P/E | 1.6x | 9.2x | 8.0x | 7.3x |
| Total Debt | $33.28B | $3.90B | $20.18B | $22.96B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $19.75B | $158M | $22.03B | $19.71B |
PRS vs UNM vs MET vs PRU — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
PRS
UNM
MET
PRU
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prudential Financia… (PRS) | 100 | 85.5 | -14.5% |
| Unum Group (UNM) | 100 | 530.1 | +430.1% |
| MetLife, Inc. (MET) | 100 | 218.9 | +118.9% |
| Prudential Financia… (PRU) | 100 | 163.1 | +63.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PRS vs UNM vs MET vs PRU
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: PRS leads in 4 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for valuation and capital efficiency and profitability and margin quality. Unum Group is the stronger pick specifically for capital preservation and lower volatility and operational efficiency and capital deployment. MET also leads in specific categories worth noting. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
PRS
Prudential Financial, Inc. 5.62
The Insurance Pick
PRS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.77, yield 23.8%
- Beta 0.77, yield 23.8%
- Lower P/E (1.6x vs 7.3x)
- Combined ratio 0.9 vs MET's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting)
Best for: income & stability and defensive
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.
- 177.2% 10Y total return vs MET's 153.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, Low D/E 35.1%
- Beta 0.48 vs MET's 1.09, lower leverage
- 1.6% ROA vs PRS's 0.5%, ROIC 4.7% vs 8.0%
Best for: long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night
MET
MetLife, Inc.
The Insurance Pick
MET is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 10.2%, EPS growth -19.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.3%
- 10.2% revenue growth vs PRU's -14.0%
Best for: growth exposure
PRU
Prudential Financial, Inc.
The Insurance Play
PRU lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Best for: financial services exposure
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | MET | 10.2% revenue growth vs PRU's -14.0% |
| Value | PRS | Lower P/E (1.6x vs 7.3x) |
| Quality / Margins | PRS | Combined ratio 0.9 vs MET's 0.9 (lower = better underwriting) |
| Stability / Safety | UNM | Beta 0.48 vs MET's 1.09, lower leverage |
| Dividends | PRS | 23.8% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs UNM's 2.2% |
| Momentum (1Y) | PRS | +5.2% vs UNM's +2.0% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | UNM | 1.6% ROA vs PRS's 0.5%, ROIC 4.7% vs 8.0% |
PRS vs UNM vs MET vs PRU — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FY 2025
FY 2025
FY 2025
FY 2025
PRS vs UNM vs MET vs PRU — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLUNMLAGGINGPRU
Who Leads Where
UNM leads in 2 of 6 categories
PRS leads 1 • MET leads 1 • PRU leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓PRUPrudential Financial,…
0leads
METMetLife, Inc.
1leads
PRSPrudential Financial,…
1leads
UNMUnum Group
2leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs PRSvs METMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
Tied
—
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
PRS6/6
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
MET5/9
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
UNM5/6
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
UNM2/2
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
Tied
—
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — UNM and MET each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MET is the larger business by revenue, generating $76.9B annually — 5.8x UNM's $13.3B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 5.9% (UNM) to 4.7% (MET). On growth, PRS holds the edge at +15.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | UNMUnum Group | METMetLife, Inc. | PRUPrudential Financ… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $62.8B | $13.3B | $76.9B | $61.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $4.1B | $1.1B | $5.9B | $5.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $3.5B | $781M | $3.6B | $3.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $9.8B | $539M | $16.5B | $9.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +32.2% | +33.9% | +28.4% | +30.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.1% | +7.5% | +6.3% | +8.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.5% | +5.9% | +4.7% | +5.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +15.6% | +4.1% | +21.5% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +15.3% | +9.0% | +4.4% | +6.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -12.8% | +33.0% | +35.9% | -12.8% |
Evenly matched — UNM and MET each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
PRS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 2.3x trailing earnings, PRS trades at a 88% valuation discount to UNM's 18.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, PRS's 4.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than UNM's 15.8x.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | UNMUnum Group | METMetLife, Inc. | PRUPrudential Financ… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.0B | $13.0B | $51.4B | $34.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $21.5B | $16.7B | $49.5B | $37.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 2.29x | 18.76x | 16.42x | 9.73x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1.59x | 9.18x | 8.05x | 7.35x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 9.73x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 4.38x | 15.82x | 8.66x | 7.70x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.13x | 0.99x | 0.67x | 0.57x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.23x | 1.25x | 1.81x | 0.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 1.27x | 23.35x | 2.84x | 5.51x |
PRS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MET leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MET delivers a 12.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 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 PRS's 0.94x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MET scores 8/9 vs UNM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | UNMUnum Group | METMetLife, Inc. | PRUPrudential Financ… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.2% | +7.1% | +12.7% | +10.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.5% | +1.6% | +0.5% | +0.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.0% | +4.7% | +13.1% | +10.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.6% | +1.5% | +1.0% | +0.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.94x | 0.35x | 0.70x | 0.65x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $13.5B | $3.7B | -$1.8B | $3.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $19.7B | $158M | $22.0B | $19.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $33.3B | $3.9B | $20.2B | $23.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 5.48x | 5.51x | 4.76x |
MET leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
UNM leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in UNM five years ago would be worth $29,376 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,688 for PRS. Over the past 12 months, PRS leads with a +5.2% total return vs UNM's +2.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors UNM at 24.0% vs PRS's 3.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | UNMUnum Group | METMetLife, Inc. | PRUPrudential Financ… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -3.1% | +5.2% | -1.2% | -11.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +5.2% | +2.0% | +4.9% | +3.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.7% | +90.5% | +58.9% | +39.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.9% | +193.8% | +32.9% | +17.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +33.9% | +177.2% | +153.9% | +89.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +3.1% | +24.0% | +16.7% | +11.7% |
UNM leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
UNM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
UNM is the less volatile stock with a 0.48 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MET's 1.09 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 PRU's 83.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | UNMUnum Group | METMetLife, Inc. | PRUPrudential Financ… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.77x | 0.48x | 1.09x | 0.97x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $25.19 | $83.13 | $83.64 | $119.76 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.84 | $68.28 | $67.33 | $91.89 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.9% | +96.6% | +94.2% | +83.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.7 | 61.0 | 67.1 | 58.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 34K | 1.5M | 3.5M | 2.3M |
UNM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — PRS and UNM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: UNM as "Hold", MET as "Buy", PRU as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 22.4% upside for MET (target: $97) vs 4.7% for PRU (target: $104). For income investors, PRS offers the higher dividend yield at 23.78% vs UNM's 2.21%.
| Metric | PRSPrudential Financ… | UNMUnum Group | METMetLife, Inc. | PRUPrudential Financ… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $98.00 | $96.50 | $104.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 30 | 33 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +23.8% | +2.2% | +2.9% | +5.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 14 | 20 | 13 | 8 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $5.45 | $1.77 | $2.27 | $5.50 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +12.6% | +7.8% | +7.6% | +2.9% |
Evenly matched — PRS and UNM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway
UNM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). PRS leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
Best OverallUnum Group (UNM)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
PRS vs UNM vs MET vs PRU: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PRS or UNM or MET or PRU a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MetLife, Inc.
(MET) is the stronger pick with 10. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -14. 0% for Prudential Financial, Inc. (PRU). Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 (PRS) offers the better valuation at 2. 3x trailing P/E (1. 6x 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.
02Which has the better valuation — PRS or UNM or MET or PRU?
On trailing P/E, Prudential Financial, Inc.
5. 62 (PRS) is the cheapest at 2. 3x versus Unum Group at 18. 8x. On forward P/E, Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 is actually cheaper at 1. 6x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PRS or UNM or MET or PRU?
Over the past 5 years, Unum Group (UNM) delivered a total return of +193.
8%, compared to +6. 9% for Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 (PRS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UNM returned +177. 2% versus PRS's +33. 9%. 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 — PRS or UNM or MET or PRU?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Unum Group (UNM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
48β versus MetLife, Inc. 's 1. 09β — meaning MET is approximately 128% 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 94% for Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PRS or UNM or MET or PRU?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MetLife, Inc.
(MET) is pulling ahead at 10. 2% versus -14. 0% for Prudential Financial, Inc. (PRU). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Prudential Financial, Inc. grew EPS 36. 3% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — PRS or UNM or MET or PRU?
Prudential Financial, Inc.
5. 62 (PRS) is the more profitable company, earning 5. 9% net margin versus 4. 4% for MetLife, Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PRS leads at 7. 9% versus 6. 0% for MET. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PRS 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.
07Is PRS or UNM or MET or PRU more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Prudential Financial, Inc.
5. 62 (PRS) trades at 1. 6x forward P/E versus 9. 2x for Unum Group — 7. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MET: 22. 4% to $96. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — PRS or UNM or MET or PRU?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Prudential Financial, Inc. 5. 62 (PRS) offers the highest yield at 23. 8%, versus 2. 2% for Unum Group (UNM).
09Is PRS or UNM or MET or PRU 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, +177. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UNM: +177. 2%, MET: +153. 9%), 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 PRS and UNM and MET and PRU?
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: PRS is a small-cap deep-value stock; UNM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MET is a mid-cap deep-value stock; PRU is a mid-cap deep-value 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.
Revenue Growth>
%
(PRS: 15.3% · UNM: 9.0%)Net Margin>
%
(PRS: 5.5% · UNM: 5.9%)P/E Ratio<
x
(PRS: 2.3x · UNM: 18.8x)You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.