Advertisement
ARES vs OWL
Which Stock Would AI Choose? Ares Management Corporation (ARES) vs. Blue Owl Capital Inc. (OWL) Stock Comparison
Key Takeaways
- Ares Management Corporation (ARES) and Blue Owl Capital Inc. (OWL) are alternative asset managers heavily exposed to private credit, both facing sector headwinds from redemption pressures and performance concerns in recent weeks.
- ARES maintains a significantly larger market capitalization at $25.3 billion compared to OWL's $6.0 billion, reflecting greater scale and diversification across credit, private equity, and real estate.
- OWL offers a higher forward dividend yield of 10.09% versus ARES's 4.81%, appealing to income-focused investors amid volatile market positioning.
- Both stocks have declined sharply from 52-week highs—ARES by about 43% from $195.26 and OWL by roughly 58% from $21.08—driven by private credit stress.
- Recent developments include OWL capping fund withdrawals due to surging redemptions, while ARES announced financing deals signaling operational resilience.
Introduction
This stock comparison examines ARES and OWL, two prominent players in the alternative asset management sector with significant private credit exposure. Both firms cater to institutional and high-net-worth investors seeking yield in non-traditional assets. Traders and investors tracking financial services, particularly amid recent private credit market turbulence, may find value in understanding their relative performance, risk profiles, and growth drivers. This analysis highlights key metrics and recent market dynamics to inform stock comparison decisions in the current environment.
ARES Overview and Recent Performance
Ares Management Corporation (ARES) is a leading alternative asset manager offering direct lending, private equity, and real estate investments, with total assets under management (AUM) exceeding $622 billion, including $384.9 billion in fee-earning AUM as of late 2025. The firm targets middle-market companies across North America, Europe, and Asia. In recent market activity, ARES shares traded around $112, down notably from the 52-week high of $195.26 but above the low of $95.80. Sentiment has been influenced by private credit challenges, including a fund's steep monthly loss and broader sector redemption pressures, though positive financing announcements like a $5.4 billion real estate raise and involvement in high-profile deals have provided counterbalance. Year-to-date performance stands at approximately 29.65%, with a trailing P/E of 65.60 reflecting growth expectations despite volatility.
OWL Overview and Recent Performance
Blue Owl Capital Inc. (OWL) specializes in private financing solutions, including direct lending, GP strategic capital, and real estate debt, serving middle-market firms and asset managers. Shares recently closed at $8.92, marking a steep decline from the 52-week high of $21.08 to a low of $7.95. Recent weeks have seen heightened pressure from surging redemption requests, prompting the firm to cap withdrawals at quarterly limits and exposure to distressed assets like a U.K. deal. Despite these headwinds, year-to-date returns are around 39.11%, supported by a high dividend yield of 10.09%, though the trailing P/E of 89.20 indicates elevated valuations amid uncertainty. Upcoming Q1 earnings are anticipated to show AUM growth but tempered by private credit dynamics.
Trending AI Robots
Tickeron’s Trending AI Robots page showcases the top-performing AI trading bots selected from hundreds available on the platform—specifically, 25 standout bots out of 351 total AI agents analyzed for current market conditions. These bots employ diverse strategies, including real-time signal generation for copy trading across stocks, ETFs, and crypto, with timeframes ranging from 5-minute to 60-minute intervals and risk levels from low to high volatility. Signal Agents offer no-minimum-balance copy trading, Virtual Agents include customizable risk management, and Brokerage Agents execute from Tickeron’s accounts. Performance varies by bot, highlighting win rates, profit factors, and trade volumes tailored to trending tickers. Traders can explore these curated tools to align with prevailing market patterns and enhance decision-making.
Head-to-Head Comparison
ARES and OWL share business models centered on alternative assets, particularly private credit, but ARES offers broader diversification into private equity and real estate, potentially buffering sector risks. Growth drivers for both hinge on AUM expansion amid middle-market lending demand, though OWL's focus on GP stakes and liquid credit introduces unique catalysts. Recent momentum favors neither decisively, with both experiencing pullbacks from peaks due to private credit stress—OWL more acutely from redemption caps. Risk factors include high leverage (ARES debt/equity at 163% vs. OWL's 64%) and sensitivity to interest rates. Sector exposure overlaps in financial services, but market sentiment leans toward ARES's scale for stability versus OWL's higher yield tradeoff.
Tickeron AI Verdict
Tickeron’s AI analysis currently leans toward ARES over OWL, based on superior scale, diversified revenue streams, and relatively consistent trend positioning amid private credit volatility. While OWL presents income appeal, its sharper declines and redemption challenges suggest higher near-term risks. Observable factors like ARES's larger AUM and recent deal flow indicate a probabilistic edge in stability and recovery potential under current conditions.
Disclaimer
The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer. Disclaimers and Limitations
To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is ARES is a Hold and OWL is a Hold.
Long-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).
ARES’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileOWL’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- ARES’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- OWL’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Short-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.
If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.
ARES’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while OWL’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).
- ARES’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.
- OWL’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
ARES (@Investment Managers) experienced а -1.64% price change this week, while OWL (@Investment Managers) price change was -1.95% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was +0.17%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -0.04%, and the average quarterly price growth was -6.94%.
Reported Earning Dates
ARES is expected to report earnings on Jul 31, 2026.
OWL is expected to report earnings on Jul 30, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Investment Managers (+0.17% weekly)Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.
| ARES | OWL | ARES / OWL | |
| Capitalization | 29.2B | 6.44B | 453% |
| EBITDA | 2.23B | 951M | 234% |
| Gain YTD | -18.071 | -33.416 | 54% |
| P/E Ratio | 59.60 | 79.42 | 75% |
| Revenue | 5.91B | 2.94B | 201% |
| Total Cash | N/A | 190M | - |
| Total Debt | 14.1B | 4.36B | 324% |
ARES | ||
|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 41 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 14 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 52 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 97 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 52 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 88 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 36 |
Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.
| ARES | OWL | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 59% | 3 days ago 78% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 77% | 3 days ago 68% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 70% | 3 days ago 63% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 62% | 3 days ago 71% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 73% | 3 days ago 72% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 5 days ago 78% | 20 days ago 76% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 18 days ago 65% | 6 days ago 71% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 62% | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 69% | 3 days ago 73% |
Advertisement
ARES and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, ARES has been closely correlated with KKR. These tickers have moved in lockstep 82% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if ARES jumps, then KKR could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To ARES | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARES | 100% | +0.77% | ||
| KKR - ARES | 82% Closely correlated | -0.16% | ||
| OWL - ARES | 78% Closely correlated | +0.42% | ||
| BX - ARES | 78% Closely correlated | -0.98% | ||
| TPG - ARES | 77% Closely correlated | -1.20% | ||
| APO - ARES | 76% Closely correlated | -1.02% | ||
More | ||||
OWL and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, OWL has been closely correlated with ARES. These tickers have moved in lockstep 78% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if OWL jumps, then ARES could also see price increases.