Lincoln National vs MetLife
LNC and MET side by side, both in life insurance. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How LNC and MET compare
MetLife is the larger company, worth 8.1 times as much as Lincoln National ($63.6B against $7.9B).
On earnings, Lincoln National is cheaper: it trades at 3.6× trailing earnings, against 19.2× for MetLife.
MetLife grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.7% versus 7.9% for Lincoln National).
Lincoln National keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.2% compared with 4.6% at MetLife.
Both pay dividends: Lincoln National yields 4.4% and MetLife 2.3%.
Lincoln National scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 7 for MetLife), 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 | LNC | MET |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.9B | $63.6B |
| Share price | $41.01 | $100.02 |
| Change, 1 year | 2.4% | 27.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −43.4% | 56.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.38 | 0.87 |
| Employees | 9,423 | 46K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 3.6× (better) | 19.2× |
| P/S | 0.4× (better) | 0.8× |
| P/B | 0.7× (better) | 2.3× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 5.6× |
| Fair value | $66.35 | $61.83 |
| Margin of safety | 38.2% (better) | −61.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.9% | 8.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 0.87% | 2.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 108% (better) | −15.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 101% (better) | −11.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 17.9% (better) | −3.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | – | 8.3% |
| Net margin | 12.2% (better) | 4.6% |
| Return on equity | 22.6% (better) | 13.2% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 843% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.04 | 0.02 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −4.09 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.09 | 0.27 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.4% (better) | 2.3% |
| Payout ratio | 14.6% | 41.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 13 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.1% | 4.3% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 3.8% |
| Shareholder yield | 4.4% | 6.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.9% | 76.5% |
| Held by insiders | 10.9% | 16.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$3.6M | −$1.7M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.5% | 2.1% |
Go deeper
- LNC stock overview
- LNC income statement
- LNC valuation and score
- MET stock overview
- MET income statement
- MET valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.