MetLife vs Prudential Financial
MET and PRU side by side, both in life insurance. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MET and PRU compare
MetLife is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as Prudential Financial ($63.6B against $40.2B).
On earnings, Prudential Financial is cheaper: it trades at 10.5× trailing earnings, against 19.2× for MetLife.
Prudential Financial grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (9.4% versus 8.7% for MetLife).
Prudential Financial keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.0% compared with 4.6% at MetLife.
Both pay dividends: MetLife yields 2.3% and Prudential Financial 4.8%.
Prudential Financial scores higher on the StockData Score (13 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 | MET | PRU |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $63.6B | $40.2B |
| Share price | $100.02 | $116.45 |
| Change, 1 year | 27.7% | 15.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 56.3% | 5.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.87 | 0.96 |
| Employees | 46K | 52K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.2× | 10.5× (better) |
| P/S | 0.8× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/B | 2.3× | 1.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 5.6× (better) | 9.7× |
| Fair value | $61.83 | $121.85 |
| Margin of safety | −61.8% | 4.4% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.7% | 9.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.6% (better) | 1.3% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −15.4% | 140% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −11.5% | 144% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −3.7% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 8.3% | – |
| Net margin | 4.6% | 6.0% (better) |
| Return on equity | 13.2% (better) | 12.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 843% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.02 (better) | 0.65 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −4.09 | 1.15 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.27 (better) | 0.18 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% | 4.8% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 41.6% | 49.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 13 (better) | 12 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.3% (better) | 4.2% |
| Buyback yield | 3.8% (better) | 2.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.2% | 7.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 76.5% | 63.4% |
| Held by insiders | 16.4% | 0.25% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.7M (better) | −$9.0M |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.1% | – |
Go deeper
- MET stock overview
- MET income statement
- MET valuation and score
- PRU stock overview
- PRU income statement
- PRU valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.