Asset Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SEIC vs NTRS vs BEN vs IVZ vs VRTS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management
SEIC vs NTRS vs BEN vs IVZ vs VRTS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $10.99B | $29.66B | $15.86B | $11.92B | $949M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.30B | $14.30B | $8.77B | $6.38B | $831M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $715M | $1.74B | $812M | $-243M | $138M |
| Gross Margin | 59.2% | 56.5% | 80.3% | 43.2% | 74.9% |
| Operating Margin | 27.3% | 16.3% | 6.9% | -10.9% | 17.4% |
| Forward P/E | 15.2x | 14.8x | 11.2x | 10.4x | 5.5x |
| Total Debt | $9M | $16.43B | $13.30B | $10.12B | $2.84B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $400M | $61.13B | $3.57B | $1.98B | $477M |
SEIC vs NTRS vs BEN vs IVZ vs VRTS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| SEI Investments Com… (SEIC) | 100 | 165.8 | +65.8% |
| Northern Trust Corp… (NTRS) | 100 | 202.5 | +102.5% |
| Franklin Resources,… (BEN) | 100 | 161.8 | +61.8% |
| Invesco Ltd. (IVZ) | 100 | 336.6 | +236.6% |
| Virtus Investment P… (VRTS) | 100 | 152.5 | +52.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SEIC vs NTRS vs BEN vs IVZ vs VRTS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SEIC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 8.1%, EPS growth 27.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.85, Low D/E 0.3%, current ratio 3.29x
- 8.1% NII/revenue growth vs NTRS's -9.9%
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BEN's 0.7% (lower = leaner)
NTRS is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and bank quality.
- 170.2% 10Y total return vs SEIC's 101.6%
- NIM 1.4% vs VRTS's 0.9%
Among these 5 stocks, BEN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
IVZ ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +93.1% vs VRTS's -5.5%
VRTS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Dividend streak 7 yrs, beta 1.14, yield 6.6%
- PEG 0.38 vs NTRS's 1.50
- Beta 1.14, yield 6.6%, current ratio 3.80x
- Lower P/E (5.5x vs 11.2x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.1% NII/revenue growth vs NTRS's -9.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (5.5x vs 11.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BEN's 0.7% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.85 vs IVZ's 1.67, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 6.6% yield, 7-year raise streak, vs SEIC's 1.1% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +93.1% vs VRTS's -5.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BEN's 0.7% |
SEIC vs NTRS vs BEN vs IVZ vs VRTS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
SEIC vs NTRS vs BEN vs IVZ vs VRTS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
VRTS leads in 1 of 6 categories
SEIC leads 1 • NTRS leads 1 • BEN leads 0 • IVZ leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — SEIC and BEN each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTRS is the larger business by revenue, generating $14.3B annually — 17.2x VRTS's $831M. SEIC is the more profitable business, keeping 31.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IVZ's -4.4%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.3B | $14.3B | $8.8B | $6.4B | $831M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $701M | $3.2B | $1.2B | $1.2B | $205M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $715M | $1.7B | $812M | -$243M | $138M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $582M | $4.7B | $938M | $1.9B | -$67M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +59.2% | +56.5% | +80.3% | +43.2% | +74.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +27.3% | +16.3% | +6.9% | -10.9% | +17.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +31.1% | +12.1% | +6.0% | -4.4% | +16.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +25.5% | +38.2% | +10.4% | +22.6% | -8.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +16.0% | +7.1% | +100.0% | +34.2% | +10.9% |
Valuation Metrics
VRTS leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.1x trailing earnings, VRTS trades at a 79% valuation discount to BEN's 33.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), VRTS offers better value at 0.48x vs NTRS's 1.86x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $11.0B | $29.7B | $15.9B | $11.9B | $949M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $10.6B | -$15.0B | $25.6B | $20.1B | $3.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.97x | 18.31x | 33.54x | -16.77x | 7.10x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.16x | 14.80x | 11.21x | 10.44x | 5.55x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.19x | 1.86x | — | — | 0.48x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.95x | -4.68x | 22.53x | 16.34x | 16.20x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.78x | 2.07x | 1.81x | 1.87x | 1.14x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.16x | 2.33x | 1.11x | 0.94x | 0.95x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 18.78x | 5.43x | 17.40x | 8.27x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
SEIC leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SEIC delivers a 29.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $29 in annual profit, vs $-2 for IVZ. SEIC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VRTS's 2.74x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SEIC scores 6/9 vs VRTS's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +29.4% | +13.4% | +5.6% | -1.7% | +13.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +25.3% | +1.0% | +2.5% | -0.9% | +3.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +18.8% | +6.0% | +1.6% | -2.3% | +3.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +24.2% | +9.0% | +2.0% | -2.6% | +3.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 1.27x | 0.94x | 0.78x | 2.74x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$391M | -$44.7B | $9.7B | $8.1B | $2.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $400M | $61.1B | $3.6B | $2.0B | $477M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $9M | $16.4B | $13.3B | $10.1B | $2.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2130.23x | 0.38x | 15.19x | -6.19x | 2.15x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NTRS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SEIC five years ago would be worth $14,911 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,496 for VRTS. Over the past 12 months, IVZ leads with a +93.1% total return vs VRTS's -5.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTRS at 32.3% vs VRTS's 0.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +8.3% | +15.5% | +29.6% | +0.4% | -9.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +12.8% | +66.6% | +55.5% | +93.1% | -5.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +57.4% | +131.7% | +35.3% | +79.8% | +0.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +49.1% | +46.7% | +7.4% | +8.2% | -35.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +101.6% | +170.2% | +23.5% | +22.1% | +142.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.3% | +32.3% | +10.6% | +21.6% | +0.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SEIC and BEN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SEIC is the less volatile stock with a 0.85 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than IVZ's 1.67 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BEN currently trades 97.1% from its 52-week high vs VRTS's 65.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.85x | 1.14x | 1.31x | 1.67x | 1.14x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $93.96 | $173.19 | $31.44 | $29.61 | $215.06 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $75.08 | $97.00 | $20.08 | $14.10 | $121.61 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +95.7% | +92.4% | +97.1% | +90.6% | +65.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 69.2 | 59.4 | 78.4 | 69.4 | 55.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 958K | 1.1M | 5.1M | 5.1M | 101K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — SEIC and VRTS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SEIC as "Buy", NTRS as "Hold", BEN as "Hold", IVZ as "Hold", VRTS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 15.0% upside for VRTS (target: $163) vs -5.8% for BEN (target: $29). For income investors, VRTS offers the higher dividend yield at 6.58% vs SEIC's 1.10%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $100.67 | $153.75 | $28.75 | $29.72 | $163.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 35 | 27 | 28 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.1% | +2.0% | +4.3% | +3.1% | +6.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 12 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 7 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.99 | $3.14 | $1.33 | $0.83 | $9.32 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.7% | +4.3% | +1.5% | +15.6% | +6.3% |
VRTS leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). SEIC leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
SEIC vs NTRS vs BEN vs IVZ vs VRTS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SEIC or NTRS or BEN or IVZ or VRTS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, SEI Investments Company (SEIC) is the stronger pick with 8.
1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 9% for Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS). Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS) offers the better valuation at 7. 1x trailing P/E (5. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate SEI Investments Company (SEIC) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — SEIC or NTRS or BEN or IVZ or VRTS?
On trailing P/E, Virtus Investment Partners, Inc.
(VRTS) is the cheapest at 7. 1x versus Franklin Resources, Inc. at 33. 5x. On forward P/E, Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. is actually cheaper at 5. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. wins at 0. 38x versus Northern Trust Corporation's 1. 50x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SEIC or NTRS or BEN or IVZ or VRTS?
Over the past 5 years, SEI Investments Company (SEIC) delivered a total return of +49.
1%, compared to -35. 0% for Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTRS returned +170. 2% versus IVZ's +22. 1%. 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 — SEIC or NTRS or BEN or IVZ or VRTS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), SEI Investments Company (SEIC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
85β versus Invesco Ltd. 's 1. 67β — meaning IVZ is approximately 98% more volatile than SEIC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, SEI Investments Company (SEIC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 3% for Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SEIC or NTRS or BEN or IVZ or VRTS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), SEI Investments Company (SEIC) is pulling ahead at 8.
1% versus -9. 9% for Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: SEI Investments Company grew EPS 27. 7% year-over-year, compared to -235. 6% for Invesco Ltd.. 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 — SEIC or NTRS or BEN or IVZ or VRTS?
SEI Investments Company (SEIC) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
1% net margin versus -4. 4% for Invesco Ltd. — meaning it keeps 31. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SEIC leads at 27. 3% versus -10. 9% for IVZ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BEN leads at 80. 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.
07Is SEIC or NTRS or BEN or IVZ or VRTS 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, Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 38x versus Northern Trust Corporation's 1. 50x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS) trades at 5. 5x forward P/E versus 15. 2x for SEI Investments Company — 9. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for VRTS: 15. 0% to $163. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — SEIC or NTRS or BEN or IVZ or VRTS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS) offers the highest yield at 6. 6%, versus 1. 1% for SEI Investments Company (SEIC).
09Is SEIC or NTRS or BEN or IVZ or VRTS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, SEI Investments Company (SEIC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
85), 1. 1% yield, +101. 6% 10Y return). Invesco Ltd. (IVZ) carries a higher beta of 1. 67 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SEIC: +101. 6%, IVZ: +22. 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.
10What are the main differences between SEIC and NTRS and BEN and IVZ and VRTS?
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: SEIC is a mid-cap deep-value stock; NTRS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; BEN is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; IVZ is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; VRTS is a small-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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.