MET Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Allstate has a net margin of 7.35% compared to MetLife's net margin of 7.16%. MetLife's return on equity of 13.1% beat Allstate's return on equity of 23.5%.

MetLife has a consensus price target of $91.75, signalling upside risk potential of 11.55%. On the other hand Allstate has an analysts' consensus of $223.18 which suggests that it could grow by 14.15%. Given that Allstate has higher upside potential than MetLife, analysts believe Allstate is more attractive than MetLife.

MetLife has a beta of 1.065, which suggesting that the stock is 6.465% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Allstate has a beta of 0.504, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 49.607%.

MetLife has a quarterly dividend of $0.55 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.62%. Allstate offers a yield of 1.88% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.92 per share. MetLife pays 111.79% of its earnings as a dividend. Allstate pays out -548.94% of its earnings as a dividend.

MetLife quarterly revenues are $18.3B, which are larger than Allstate quarterly revenues of $16.6B. MetLife's net income of $1.3B is higher than Allstate's net income of $1.2B. Notably, MetLife's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.58x while Allstate's PE ratio is 12.66x. 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 MetLife is 0.84x versus 0.83x for Allstate. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Lincoln National has a net margin of 7.35% compared to MetLife's net margin of -12.58%. MetLife's return on equity of 13.1% beat Lincoln National's return on equity of 5.12%.

MetLife has a consensus price target of $91.75, signalling upside risk potential of 11.55%. On the other hand Lincoln National has an analysts' consensus of $36.09 which suggests that it could grow by 13.71%. Given that Lincoln National has higher upside potential than MetLife, analysts believe Lincoln National is more attractive than MetLife.

MetLife has a beta of 1.065, which suggesting that the stock is 6.465% more 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%.

MetLife has a quarterly dividend of $0.55 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.62%. Lincoln National offers a yield of 5.67% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.45 per share. MetLife pays 111.79% of its earnings as a dividend. Lincoln National pays out -51.46% of its earnings as a dividend.

MetLife quarterly revenues are $18.3B, which are larger than Lincoln National quarterly revenues of $4.2B. MetLife's net income of $1.3B is higher than Lincoln National's net income of -$528M. Notably, MetLife's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.58x 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 MetLife is 0.84x versus 0.40x for Lincoln National. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Primerica has a net margin of 7.35% compared to MetLife's net margin of 21.23%. MetLife's return on equity of 13.1% beat Primerica's return on equity of 21.41%.

MetLife has a consensus price target of $91.75, signalling upside risk potential of 11.55%. On the other hand Primerica has an analysts' consensus of $309.33 which suggests that it could grow by 13.84%. Given that Primerica has higher upside potential than MetLife, analysts believe Primerica is more attractive than MetLife.

MetLife has a beta of 1.065, which suggesting that the stock is 6.465% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Primerica has a beta of 1.090, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 8.951%.

MetLife has a quarterly dividend of $0.55 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.62%. Primerica offers a yield of 1.22% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.90 per share. MetLife pays 111.79% of its earnings as a dividend. Primerica pays out 16.25% of its earnings as a dividend. Primerica's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but MetLife's is not.

MetLife quarterly revenues are $18.3B, which are larger than Primerica quarterly revenues of $774.1M. MetLife's net income of $1.3B is higher than Primerica's net income of $164.4M. Notably, MetLife's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.58x while Primerica's PE ratio is 20.76x. 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 MetLife is 0.84x versus 3.04x for Primerica. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Prudential Financial has a net margin of 7.35% compared to MetLife's net margin of 2.29%. MetLife's return on equity of 13.1% beat Prudential Financial's return on equity of 13.78%.

MetLife has a consensus price target of $91.75, signalling upside risk potential of 11.55%. On the other hand Prudential Financial has an analysts' consensus of $119.50 which suggests that it could grow by 8.81%. Given that MetLife has higher upside potential than Prudential Financial, analysts believe MetLife is more attractive than Prudential Financial.

MetLife has a beta of 1.065, which suggesting that the stock is 6.465% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Prudential Financial has a beta of 1.296, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 29.613%.

MetLife has a quarterly dividend of $0.55 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.62%. Prudential Financial offers a yield of 4.36% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $1.30 per share. MetLife pays 111.79% of its earnings as a dividend. Prudential Financial pays out 74.2% of its earnings as a dividend. Prudential Financial's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but MetLife's is not.

MetLife quarterly revenues are $18.3B, which are smaller than Prudential Financial quarterly revenues of $19.5B. MetLife's net income of $1.3B is higher than Prudential Financial's net income of $448M. Notably, MetLife's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.58x while Prudential Financial's PE ratio is 10.60x. 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 MetLife is 0.84x versus 0.59x for Prudential Financial. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.