Brookfield Asset Management vs Franklin Templeton
BAM and BEN side by side, both in services allied with the exchange of securities. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BAM and BEN compare
Brookfield Asset Management grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (47.9% versus 7.3% for Franklin Templeton).
Brookfield Asset Management keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 81.0% compared with 11.4% at Franklin Templeton.
Franklin Templeton pays a dividend yielding 3.7%; Brookfield Asset Management does not pay one.
Franklin Templeton scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 7 for Brookfield Asset Management), 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 | BAM | BEN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $18.3B |
| Share price | $51.53 | $36.02 |
| Change, 1 year | −5.8% | 56.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −13.5% | 3.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.26 | 1.15 |
| Employees | 150 | 9,900 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 2 | 2 |
| Health score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 18.3× |
| P/S | – | 1.9× |
| P/B | – | 1.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 11.9× |
| P/FCF | – | 22.4× |
| PEG | – | 3.95 |
| FCF yield | – | 4.5% |
| Fair value | – | $34.14 |
| Margin of safety | – | −5.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 47.9% (better) | 7.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 2.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 118% (better) | 105% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 116% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −11.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | – | 12.5% |
| Net margin | 81.0% (better) | 11.4% |
| FCF margin | – | 8.7% |
| Return on equity | 63.5% (better) | 9.0% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 11.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | – | 12.4× |
| Altman Z-score | – | 1.23 |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 3.7% |
| Payout ratio | 58.0% | 64.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 7 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 3.3% |
| Buyback yield | – | 2.8% |
| Shareholder yield | – | 6.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 93.3% | 53.6% |
| Held by insiders | 76.6% | 21.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$5.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.3% | 4.2% |
Go deeper
- BAM stock overview
- BAM income statement
- BAM valuation and score
- BEN stock overview
- BEN income statement
- BEN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.