BAM
Price
$56.58
Change
-$0.66 (-1.15%)
Updated
May 23, 04:59 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
16.34B
PGPHF
Price
$1380.45
Change
-$5.79 (-0.42%)
Updated
May 21 closing price
Capitalization
29.13B
Interact to see
Advertisement

BAM vs PGPHF

Header iconBAM vs PGPHF Comparison
Open Charts BAM vs PGPHFBanner chart's image
Brookfield Asset Management
Price$56.58
Change-$0.66 (-1.15%)
Volume$22.88K
Capitalization16.34B
Partners Group Holding Zug Namen-Akt
Price$1380.45
Change-$5.79 (-0.42%)
Volume$69
Capitalization29.13B
BAM vs PGPHF Comparison Chart
Loading...
BAM
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BAM vs. PGPHF commentary
May 24, 2025

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 BAM is a Buy and PGPHF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
May 24, 2025
Stock price -- (BAM: $57.24 vs. PGPHF: $1380.45)
Brand notoriety: BAM and PGPHF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BAM: 81% vs. PGPHF: 105%
Market capitalization -- BAM: $16.34B vs. PGPHF: $29.13B
BAM [@Investment Managers] is valued at $16.34B. PGPHF’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $29.13B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $124.17B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $6.1B.

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).

BAM’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whilePGPHF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • BAM’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • PGPHF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, BAM is a better buy in the long-term than PGPHF.

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.

BAM’s TA Score shows that 6 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • BAM’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 4 bearish.

Price Growth

BAM (@Investment Managers) experienced а -3.88% price change this week, while PGPHF (@Investment Managers) price change was -0.95% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -1.01%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +6.03%, and the average quarterly price growth was +2.20%.

Reported Earning Dates

BAM is expected to report earnings on Mar 17, 2025.

PGPHF is expected to report earnings on Mar 11, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (-1.01% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
PGPHF($29.1B) has a higher market cap than BAM($16.3B). BAM has higher P/E ratio than PGPHF: BAM (37.12) vs PGPHF (25.71). BAM YTD gains are higher at: 6.457 vs. PGPHF (4.164). PGPHF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 1.57B vs. BAM (522M). PGPHF has more cash in the bank: 307M vs. BAM (9M). BAM has less debt than PGPHF: BAM (256M) vs PGPHF (1.13B). PGPHF has higher revenues than BAM: PGPHF (2.33B) vs BAM (383M).
BAMPGPHFBAM / PGPHF
Capitalization16.3B29.1B56%
EBITDA522M1.57B33%
Gain YTD6.4574.164155%
P/E Ratio37.1225.71144%
Revenue383M2.33B16%
Total Cash9M307M3%
Total Debt256M1.13B23%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BAM vs PGPHF: Fundamental Ratings
BAM
PGPHF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
1827
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
29
Undervalued
89
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
4656
SMR RATING
1..100
5940
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4257
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3271
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50n/a

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.

BAM's Valuation (29) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for PGPHF (89). This means that BAM’s stock grew somewhat faster than PGPHF’s over the last 12 months.

BAM's Profit vs Risk Rating (46) in the null industry is in the same range as PGPHF (56). This means that BAM’s stock grew similarly to PGPHF’s over the last 12 months.

PGPHF's SMR Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as BAM (59). This means that PGPHF’s stock grew similarly to BAM’s over the last 12 months.

BAM's Price Growth Rating (42) in the null industry is in the same range as PGPHF (57). This means that BAM’s stock grew similarly to PGPHF’s over the last 12 months.

BAM's P/E Growth Rating (32) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for PGPHF (71). This means that BAM’s stock grew somewhat faster than PGPHF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
BAM
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
67%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
63%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
72%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
64%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
61%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
62%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 8 days ago
65%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
64%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
61%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
BAM
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
XFIV48.530.14
+0.28%
BondBloxx Bloomberg FiveYrTrgDurUSTrsETF
JFR8.13N/A
N/A
Nuveen Floating Rate Income Fund
CADJPY103.69N/A
N/A
Canadian Dollar - Japan Yen
NTSI39.92N/A
N/A
WisdomTree International Efficnt Cr ETF
XFIX51.09N/A
N/A
F/m Opportunistic Income ETF

BAM and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BAM has been closely correlated with BN. These tickers have moved in lockstep 86% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if BAM jumps, then BN could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BAM
1D Price
Change %
BAM100%
-0.10%
BN - BAM
86%
Closely correlated
+0.39%
BX - BAM
79%
Closely correlated
N/A
CG - BAM
76%
Closely correlated
N/A
KKR - BAM
74%
Closely correlated
+0.37%
ARES - BAM
73%
Closely correlated
+0.57%
More

PGPHF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that PGPHF and BRDG have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that PGPHF and BRDG's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To PGPHF
1D Price
Change %
PGPHF100%
N/A
BRDG - PGPHF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BLK - PGPHF
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BN - PGPHF
29%
Poorly correlated
+0.39%
BAM - PGPHF
27%
Poorly correlated
-0.10%
IVZ - PGPHF
27%
Poorly correlated
-0.41%
More