MET Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Brighthouse Financial has a net margin of 7.35% compared to MetLife's net margin of 8.97%. MetLife's return on equity of 13.1% beat Brighthouse Financial's return on equity of -25.86%.

MetLife has a consensus price target of $94.38, signalling upside risk potential of 17.61%. On the other hand Brighthouse Financial has an analysts' consensus of $51.88 which suggests that it could grow by 13.41%. Given that MetLife has higher upside potential than Brighthouse Financial, analysts believe MetLife is more attractive than Brighthouse Financial.

MetLife has a beta of 1.077, which suggesting that the stock is 7.692% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Brighthouse Financial has a beta of 1.077, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 7.738%.

MetLife has a quarterly dividend of $0.55 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.69%. Brighthouse Financial offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. MetLife pays 111.79% of its earnings as a dividend. Brighthouse Financial pays out -9.17% of its earnings as a dividend.

MetLife quarterly revenues are $18.3B, which are larger than Brighthouse Financial quarterly revenues of $2B. MetLife's net income of $1.3B is higher than Brighthouse Financial's net income of $176M. Notably, MetLife's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.18x 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 MetLife is 0.82x versus -- for Brighthouse Financial. 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 $94.38, signalling upside risk potential of 17.61%. On the other hand Lincoln National has an analysts' consensus of $36.00 which suggests that it could grow by 19.76%. Given that Lincoln National has higher upside potential than MetLife, analysts believe Lincoln National is more attractive than MetLife.

MetLife has a beta of 1.077, which suggesting that the stock is 7.692% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Lincoln National has a beta of 1.788, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 78.845%.

MetLife has a quarterly dividend of $0.55 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.69%. Lincoln National offers a yield of 5.99% 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 16.18x while Lincoln National's PE ratio is 21.47x. 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 0.82x versus 0.38x 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 $94.38, signalling upside risk potential of 17.61%. On the other hand Primerica has an analysts' consensus of $314.83 which suggests that it could grow by 16%. Given that MetLife has higher upside potential than Primerica, analysts believe MetLife is more attractive than Primerica.

MetLife has a beta of 1.077, which suggesting that the stock is 7.692% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Primerica has a beta of 1.114, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 11.418%.

MetLife has a quarterly dividend of $0.55 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.69%. 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 16.18x while Primerica's PE ratio is 20.73x. 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 0.82x versus 3.03x 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 $94.38, signalling upside risk potential of 17.61%. On the other hand Prudential Financial has an analysts' consensus of $130.38 which suggests that it could grow by 13.84%. Given that MetLife has higher upside potential than Prudential Financial, analysts believe MetLife is more attractive than Prudential Financial.

MetLife has a beta of 1.077, which suggesting that the stock is 7.692% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Prudential Financial has a beta of 1.311, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 31.077%.

MetLife has a quarterly dividend of $0.55 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.69%. Prudential Financial offers a yield of 4.54% 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 16.18x while Prudential Financial's PE ratio is 10.18x. 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 0.82x versus 0.56x for Prudential Financial. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.