American Financial vs Hanover Insurance
AFG and THG side by side, both in fire, marine, and casualty insurance. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AFG and THG compare
American Financial is the larger company, worth 1.5 times as much as Hanover Insurance ($12.8B against $8.4B).
On earnings, Hanover Insurance is cheaper: it trades at 11.6× trailing earnings, against 13.4× for American Financial.
Hanover Insurance grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.6% versus −0.24% for American Financial).
American Financial keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.5% compared with 11.2% at Hanover Insurance.
Both pay dividends: American Financial yields 2.3% and Hanover Insurance 1.6%.
Hanover Insurance scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 9 for American Financial), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | AFG | THG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $12.8B | $8.4B |
| Share price | $153.87 | $242.09 |
| Change, 1 year | 18.5% | 43.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 7.6% | 92.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.56 | 0.40 |
| Employees | 8,500 | 4,900 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.4× | 11.6× (better) |
| P/S | 1.5× | 1.2× (better) |
| P/B | 2.6× | 2.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.8× | 7.9× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 6.7× |
| PEG | – | 0.15 |
| FCF yield | – | 14.9% |
| Fair value | $123.84 | $220.44 |
| Margin of safety | −24.2% | −9.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −0.24% | 5.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.2% (better) | 6.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 24.7% | 36.1% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 25.7% | 37.5% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 4.2% | 14.0% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 14.5% | 15.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 11.5% (better) | 11.2% |
| FCF margin | – | 18.5% |
| Return on equity | 20.4% | 21.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 28.6% (better) | 23.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.01 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −0.21 |
| Interest coverage | 13.5× | 22.1× (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.64 | 1.32 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% (better) | 1.6% |
| Payout ratio | 60.4% | 17.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 13.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.61% | 2.8% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 3.0% | 4.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 69.9% | 92.0% |
| Held by insiders | 13.7% | 1.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$16.0M (better) | −$16.2M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 3.0% |
Go deeper
- AFG stock overview
- AFG income statement
- AFG valuation and score
- THG stock overview
- THG income statement
- THG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.