BHF
Price
$63.88
Change
+$0.55 (+0.87%)
Updated
Jul 1, 04:59 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
3.67B
42 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
MET
Price
$87.20
Change
+$2.59 (+3.06%)
Updated
Jul 1 closing price
Capitalization
56.11B
34 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

BHF vs MET

BHF vs MET Comparison Chart in %
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BHF vs. MET commentary
Jul 02, 2026

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 BHF is a Buy and MET is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 02, 2026
Stock price -- (BHF: $63.15 vs. MET: $87.20)
Brand notoriety: BHF: Not notable vs. MET: Notable
Both companies represent the Life/Health Insurance industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BHF: 110% vs. MET: 94%
Market capitalization -- BHF: $3.67B vs. MET: $56.11B
BHF [@Life/Health Insurance] is valued at $3.67B. MET’s [@Life/Health Insurance] market capitalization is $56.11B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Life/Health Insurance] industry ranges from $154.94B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Life/Health Insurance] industry is $17.78B.

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).

BHF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileMET’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

BHF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MET’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • BHF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • MET’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, MET is a better buy in the short-term than BHF.

Price Growth

BHF (@Life/Health Insurance) experienced а +0.10% price change this week, while MET (@Life/Health Insurance) price change was +3.07% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Life/Health Insurance industry was +2.31%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +5.03%, and the average quarterly price growth was +5.35%.

Reported Earning Dates

BHF is expected to report earnings on Aug 12, 2026.

MET is expected to report earnings on Aug 05, 2026.

Industries' Descriptions

@Life/Health Insurance (+2.31% weekly)

Life insurance companies mainly sell policies that pay a death benefit as a lump sum upon the death of the insured to their beneficiaries. Life insurance policies may be sold as term life, (which guarantees payment of a stated death benefit and expires at the end of a specified term) or permanent /typically whole life (which is more expensive but lasts a lifetime and carries a cash accumulation component). Life insurance firms may also sell long-term disability policies that help to replace the insured individual’s income if they become sick or disabled. Health insurance, on the other hand, helps pay for medical expenses. Anthem, Inc., MetLife, Inc. and Aflac Incorporated are some of the largest U.S. companies in this industry.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
MET($56.1B) has a higher market cap than BHF($3.67B). MET has higher P/E ratio than BHF: MET (16.94) vs BHF (10.99). MET YTD gains are higher at: 12.106 vs. BHF (-2.531). MET has more cash in the bank: 121B vs. BHF (87.4B). BHF has less debt than MET: BHF (3.15B) vs MET (21.1B). MET has higher revenues than BHF: MET (76B) vs BHF (5.53B).
BHFMETBHF / MET
Capitalization3.67B56.1B7%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD-2.53112.106-21%
P/E Ratio10.9916.9465%
Revenue5.53B76B7%
Total Cash87.4B121B72%
Total Debt3.15B21.1B15%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BHF vs MET: Fundamental Ratings
BHF
MET
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
7417
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
48
Fair valued
31
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
6040
SMR RATING
1..100
9496
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5233
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
6328
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5065

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.

MET's Valuation (31) in the Life Or Health Insurance industry is in the same range as BHF (48). This means that MET’s stock grew similarly to BHF’s over the last 12 months.

MET's Profit vs Risk Rating (40) in the Life Or Health Insurance industry is in the same range as BHF (60). This means that MET’s stock grew similarly to BHF’s over the last 12 months.

BHF's SMR Rating (94) in the Life Or Health Insurance industry is in the same range as MET (96). This means that BHF’s stock grew similarly to MET’s over the last 12 months.

MET's Price Growth Rating (33) in the Life Or Health Insurance industry is in the same range as BHF (52). This means that MET’s stock grew similarly to BHF’s over the last 12 months.

MET's P/E Growth Rating (28) in the Life Or Health Insurance industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BHF (63). This means that MET’s stock grew somewhat faster than BHF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
BHFMET
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
50%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
70%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
63%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
62%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
67%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
57%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
68%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
59%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
51%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 21 days ago
62%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
64%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
60%
Bearish Trend 14 days ago
53%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
65%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
60%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
58%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
54%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
BHF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
MET
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
DDTJ20.080.06
+0.32%
Innovator Eq Dual Drctnl 10 Buff ETF-Jan
PGJ22.13N/A
N/A
Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF
QTEC316.18N/A
N/A
First Trust NASDAQ-100-Tech Sector ETF
UTWO47.99N/A
N/A
F/m US Treasury 2 Year Note ETF
UX27.49-0.03
-0.12%
Roundhill Uranium ETF

BHF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BHF has been loosely correlated with GNW. These tickers have moved in lockstep 34% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if BHF jumps, then GNW could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BHF
1D Price
Change %
BHF100%
N/A
GNW - BHF
34%
Loosely correlated
-0.53%
BHFAO - BHF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LNC - BHF
28%
Poorly correlated
-3.36%
BHFAP - BHF
27%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BHFAN - BHF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More