ABL Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Brighthouse Financial has a net margin of -18.21% compared to Abacus Life's net margin of 8.97%. Abacus Life's return on equity of -5.9% beat Brighthouse Financial's return on equity of -25.86%.

Abacus Life has a consensus price target of $14.38, signalling upside risk potential of 90.65%. On the other hand Brighthouse Financial has an analysts' consensus of $52.25 which suggests that it could grow by 7.4%. Given that Abacus Life has higher upside potential than Brighthouse Financial, analysts believe Abacus Life is more attractive than Brighthouse Financial.

Abacus Life has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Brighthouse Financial has a beta of 1.058, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 5.798%.

Abacus Life has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Brighthouse Financial offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Abacus Life pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Brighthouse Financial pays out -9.17% of its earnings as a dividend.

Abacus Life quarterly revenues are $28.1M, which are smaller than Brighthouse Financial quarterly revenues of $2B. Abacus Life's net income of -$5.1M is lower than Brighthouse Financial's net income of $176M. Notably, Abacus Life's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Brighthouse Financial's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Abacus Life is 5.01x versus -- for Brighthouse Financial. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Citizens has a net margin of -18.21% compared to Abacus Life's net margin of 4.52%. Abacus Life's return on equity of -5.9% beat Citizens's return on equity of 11.99%.

Abacus Life has a consensus price target of $14.38, signalling upside risk potential of 90.65%. On the other hand Citizens has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 31.58%. Given that Abacus Life has higher upside potential than Citizens, analysts believe Abacus Life is more attractive than Citizens.

Abacus Life has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Citizens has a beta of 0.090, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 91.012%.

Abacus Life has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Citizens offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Abacus Life pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Citizens pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Abacus Life quarterly revenues are $28.1M, which are smaller than Citizens quarterly revenues of $61.7M. Abacus Life's net income of -$5.1M is lower than Citizens's net income of $2.8M. Notably, Abacus Life's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Citizens's PE ratio is 8.84x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Abacus Life is 5.01x versus 0.78x for Citizens. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Genworth Financial has a net margin of -18.21% compared to Abacus Life's net margin of 4.61%. Abacus Life's return on equity of -5.9% beat Genworth Financial's return on equity of 0.98%.

Abacus Life has a consensus price target of $14.38, signalling upside risk potential of 90.65%. On the other hand Genworth Financial has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 5.78%. Given that Abacus Life has higher upside potential than Genworth Financial, analysts believe Abacus Life is more attractive than Genworth Financial.

Abacus Life has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Genworth Financial has a beta of 0.990, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 1.036%.

Abacus Life has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Genworth Financial offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Abacus Life pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Genworth Financial pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Abacus Life quarterly revenues are $28.1M, which are smaller than Genworth Financial quarterly revenues of $1.8B. Abacus Life's net income of -$5.1M is lower than Genworth Financial's net income of $85M. Notably, Abacus Life's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Genworth Financial's PE ratio is 35.45x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Abacus Life is 5.01x versus 0.44x for Genworth Financial. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Lincoln National has a net margin of -18.21% compared to Abacus Life's net margin of -12.58%. Abacus Life's return on equity of -5.9% beat Lincoln National's return on equity of 5.12%.

Abacus Life has a consensus price target of $14.38, signalling upside risk potential of 90.65%. On the other hand Lincoln National has an analysts' consensus of $36.09 which suggests that it could grow by 13.71%. Given that Abacus Life has higher upside potential than Lincoln National, analysts believe Abacus Life is more attractive than Lincoln National.

Abacus Life has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Lincoln National has a beta of 1.774, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 77.395%.

Abacus Life has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Lincoln National offers a yield of 5.67% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.45 per share. Abacus Life pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Lincoln National pays out -51.46% of its earnings as a dividend.

Abacus Life quarterly revenues are $28.1M, which are smaller than Lincoln National quarterly revenues of $4.2B. Abacus Life's net income of -$5.1M is higher than Lincoln National's net income of -$528M. Notably, Abacus Life's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Lincoln National's PE ratio is 22.67x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Abacus Life is 5.01x versus 0.40x for Lincoln National. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.