AFLAC (AFL) vs MetLife (MET)
Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 8, 2026.
Summary
MetLife (MET) has outperformed AFLAC (AFL) over the past year, gaining 15.7% versus a loss of 0.2%. Over five years, AFL leads with a +103.0% price change compared with +46.1% for MET. MetLife is the larger company by market cap ($60.87 billion vs $56.52 billion), about 1.1 times the size.
On valuation, MetLife trades at a lower forward P/E (8.6x vs 14.9x for AFLAC). MetLife offers the higher dividend yield (2.40% vs 2.11%). AFLAC converts more of its revenue into profit, with a net margin of 21.2% versus 4.4%.
Summary generated from market data by MetaCap's automated system. Methodology
Relative performance
Percent change in share price from the first common trading day shown; excludes dividends.
Head-to-head
| Metric | AFL | MET |
|---|---|---|
| Share price | $112.74 | $95.78 |
| Market cap | $56.52B | $60.87B |
| 1-day change | -0.78% | -1.42% |
| YTD return | +2.24% | +21.33% |
| 1-year return | -0.17% | +15.75% |
| 5-year return | +102.95% | +46.07% |
| P/E ratio (TTM) | 12.21 | 18.35 |
| Forward P/E | 14.87 | 8.61 |
| EPS (TTM) | $9.23 | $5.22 |
| Dividend yield | 2.11% | 2.40% |
| Annual dividend | $2.38 | $2.30 |
| Revenue (latest FY) | $17.16B | $77.08B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -9.31% | +8.59% |
| Net income (latest FY) | $3.65B | $3.38B |
| Operating margin | — | 7.96% |
| Net margin | 21.24% | 4.38% |
| 52-week high | $130.22 | $100.93 |
| 52-week low | $105.43 | $67.33 |
| Distance from 52-week high | -13.42% | -5.10% |
| Analyst consensus | hold | buy |
| Avg. price target upside | +4.78% | +12.11% |
| Average volume | 2.07M | 3.38M |
| Shares outstanding | 501.34M | 635.48M |
| Employees | 12,716 | 46,000 |
| Sector | Finance | Finance |
| Industry | Accident &Health Insurance | Life Insurance |
Highlighted cells mark the higher value for growth, returns, margins and yield, and the lower value for P/E ratios. Highlighting is a mechanical comparison, not a recommendation.
Key differences
- MET has outperformed AFL by 15.9 percentage points over the past year.
- MetLife trades at a higher earnings multiple (18.3x vs 12.2x trailing P/E).
- AFLAC is more profitable, keeping 21.2 cents of every revenue dollar as net income versus 4.4 cents for MetLife.
- MetLife grew revenue faster in its latest fiscal year (+8.59% vs -9.31%).
About AFLAC
AFL stock →Aflac Incorporated, through its subsidiaries, provides supplemental health and life insurance products. It operates in two segments, Aflac Japan and Aflac U.S.
Finance · Accident &Health Insurance · 12,716 employees
About MetLife
MET stock →MetLife, Inc., a financial services company, provides insurance, annuities, employee benefits, and asset management services worldwide. It operates in six segments: Group Benefits; Retirement and Income Solutions; Asia; Latin America; Europe, the Middle East and Africa; and MetLife Holdings.
Finance · Life Insurance · 46,000 employees
AFL vs MET FAQ
Which is bigger, AFLAC or MetLife?
MetLife (MET) is larger, with a market capitalization of $60.87B compared with $56.52B for AFLAC (AFL).
Which stock has performed better over the past year, AFL or MET?
MET returned +15.75% over the past 12 months, compared with -0.17% for AFL (price return, excluding dividends). Past performance does not predict future results.
Which has the lower P/E ratio, AFL or MET?
AFL has the lower trailing P/E at 12.2, versus 18.3 for MET. A lower P/E is not by itself a sign of a better investment; it can reflect slower expected growth or higher risk.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFLAC or MetLife?
MetLife has the higher yield at 2.40%, compared with 2.11% for AFLAC.
Are AFLAC and MetLife in the same industry?
Both are in the Finance sector, but in different industries: Accident &Health Insurance for AFLAC and Life Insurance for MetLife.