AFL vs. WFC: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at AFL and WFC, comparing key factors like performance, valuation metrics, dividends, and financial strength. It’s built for investors or anyone curious to see how these two stocks match up.
Company Overview
WFC stands out with 238.17 billion USD in market value—about 4.25× AFL’s market cap of 55.98 billion USD.
With betas of 0.83 for AFL and 1.12 for WFC, both show similar volatility profiles relative to the overall market.
| Symbol | AFL | WFC |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Aflac Incorporated | Wells Fargo & Company |
| Country | US | US |
| Sector | Financial Services | Financial Services |
| Industry | Insurance - Life | Banks - Diversified |
| CEO | Mr. Daniel Paul Amos | Mr. Charles W. Scharf |
| Price | 103.54 USD | 73.19 USD |
| Market Cap | 55.98 billion USD | 238.17 billion USD |
| Beta | 0.83 | 1.12 |
| Exchange | NYSE | NYSE |
| IPO Date | March 17, 1980 | June 1, 1972 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of AFL and WFC over the past year by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each (starting one year ago).
Hover over the lines to see the investment’s value and total return (%) at specific dates.
Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.
Valuation Metrics Comparison
For a detailed comparison of valuation metrics between AFL and WFC, please refer to the table below.
| Symbol | AFL | WFC |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | 15.70 | 12.01 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | 2.37 | 0.66 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 4.09 | 3.00 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 2.14 | 1.33 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | 22.88 | 57.77 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | 13.32 | 30.50 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 4.27 | 4.93 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | 23.91 | 94.96 |
Dividend Comparison
Both AFL and WFC offer similar dividend yields (2.09% vs. 2.19%), indicating comparable approaches to balancing income and growth.
| Symbol | AFL | WFC |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 2.09% | 2.19% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of AFL and WFC, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- With current ratios of 0.00 and 0.25, both AFL and WFC have less current assets than short-term liabilities, which could strain their working capital and force reliance on additional financing.
- Both AFL (quick ratio 0.00) and WFC (quick ratio 0.25) fall below 0.8, meaning their most liquid assets—excluding inventory—aren’t enough to meet short-term obligations. This could force them to rely on receivables, inventory turn, or external financing.
| Symbol | AFL | WFC |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 0.00 | 0.25 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 0.00 | 0.25 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 0.29 | 1.04 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.06 | 0.10 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | 21.95 | 2.50 |