MET vs. MUFG: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on October 7, 2025

Here’s a clear look at MET and MUFG, comparing key factors like historical performance, profitability, financial strength, growth, dividend, and valuation.

Company Profile

MET is a standard domestic listing, while MUFG trades as an American Depositary Receipt (ADR), offering U.S. investors access to its foreign-listed shares.

Symbol	MET	MUFG
Company Name	MetLife, Inc.	Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.
Country	United States	Japan
GICS Sector	Financials	Financials
GICS Industry	Insurance	Banks
Market Capitalization	54.78 billion USD	179.77 billion USD
Exchange	NYSE	NYSE
Listing Date	April 5, 2000	April 2, 2001
Security Type	Common Stock	ADR

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of MET and MUFG by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each. Use the tabs to select the desired time period. Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

MET vs. MUFG: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Historical Performance at a Glance

Symbol	MET	MUFG
5-Day Price Return	0.37%	-0.60%
13-Week Price Return	2.13%	17.47%
26-Week Price Return	2.59%	6.17%
52-Week Price Return	0.71%	71.92%
Month-to-Date Return	0.00%	-3.38%
Year-to-Date Return	0.60%	25.30%
10-Day Avg. Volume	3.55M	49.06M
3-Month Avg. Volume	3.18M	40.35M
3-Month Volatility	21.28%	29.85%
Beta	0.77	0.29

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

MET

15.11%

Insurance Industry

Max: 30.96%
Q3: 18.76%
Median: 14.22%
Q1: 10.34%
Min: 1.73%

MET’s Return on Equity of 15.11% is on par with the norm for the Insurance industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

MUFG

9.11%

Banks Industry

Max: 25.40%
Q3: 15.55%
Median: 12.00%
Q1: 8.98%
Min: -0.10%

MUFG’s Return on Equity of 9.11% is on par with the norm for the Banks industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

MET

5.87%

Insurance Industry

Max: 26.78%
Q3: 14.69%
Median: 9.87%
Q1: 6.59%
Min: -3.51%

Falling into the lower quartile for the Insurance industry, MET’s Net Profit Margin of 5.87% indicates weaker profitability. This means the company retains a smaller portion of each dollar in sales as profit compared to its competitors.

MUFG

25.66%

Banks Industry

Max: 54.20%
Q3: 35.73%
Median: 28.97%
Q1: 22.56%
Min: 6.98%

MUFG’s Net Profit Margin of 25.66% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Banks industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

MET

9.33%

Insurance Industry

Max: 34.52%
Q3: 20.17%
Median: 14.46%
Q1: 9.62%
Min: -2.51%

In the Insurance industry, Operating Profit Margin is often not the primary measure of operational efficiency.

MUFG

30.87%

Banks Industry

Max: 63.35%
Q3: 44.73%
Median: 37.24%
Q1: 28.25%
Min: 12.28%

MUFG’s Operating Profit Margin of 30.87% is around the midpoint for the Banks industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

Symbol	MET	MUFG
Return on Equity (TTM)	15.11%	9.11%
Return on Assets (TTM)	0.62%	0.46%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)	5.87%	25.66%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)	9.33%	30.87%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)	--	--

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

MET

0.04

Insurance Industry

Max: 2.97
Q3: 1.37
Median: 0.54
Q1: 0.15
Min: 0.00

For the Insurance industry, the Current Ratio is often not the most suitable measure of short-term liquidity.

MUFG

Banks Industry

Max: --
Q3: --
Median: --
Q1: --
Min: --

For the Banks industry, the Current Ratio is often not the most suitable measure of short-term liquidity.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

MET

0.72

Insurance Industry

Max: 1.25
Q3: 0.65
Median: 0.34
Q1: 0.23
Min: 0.00

The Debt-to-Equity Ratio is often not the primary focus for assessing leverage in the Insurance industry.

MUFG

4.55

Banks Industry

Max: 5.78
Q3: 2.66
Median: 1.05
Q1: 0.40
Min: 0.00

The Debt-to-Equity Ratio is often not the primary focus for assessing leverage in the Banks industry.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

MET

6.12

Insurance Industry

Max: 43.68
Q3: 21.45
Median: 9.67
Q1: 3.55
Min: -5.73

The Interest Coverage Ratio is often not a primary indicator of debt servicing capacity in the Insurance industry.

MUFG

Banks Industry

Max: --
Q3: --
Median: --
Q1: --
Min: --

The Interest Coverage Ratio is often not a primary indicator of debt servicing capacity in the Banks industry.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

Symbol	MET	MUFG
Current Ratio (MRQ)	0.04	--
Quick Ratio (MRQ)	0.04	--
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)	0.72	4.55
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)	6.12	--

Growth

Revenue Growth

MET vs. MUFG: A side-by-side comparison of their Revenue Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

EPS Growth

MET vs. MUFG: A side-by-side comparison of their EPS Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

Dividend

Dividend Yield (TTM)

MET

3.17%

Insurance Industry

Max: 9.80%
Q3: 5.18%
Median: 3.58%
Q1: 2.07%
Min: 0.00%

MET’s Dividend Yield of 3.17% is consistent with its peers in the Insurance industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

MUFG

2.07%

Banks Industry

Max: 11.03%
Q3: 6.00%
Median: 3.87%
Q1: 2.41%
Min: 0.00%

MUFG’s Dividend Yield of 2.07% is in the lower quartile for the Banks industry. This suggests the company’s strategy likely favors retaining earnings for growth over providing a high dividend income.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

MET

39.96%

Insurance Industry

Max: 169.40%
Q3: 85.57%
Median: 53.26%
Q1: 23.68%
Min: 0.00%

MET’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 39.96% is within the typical range for the Insurance industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

MUFG

65.29%

Banks Industry

Max: 134.24%
Q3: 79.39%
Median: 55.09%
Q1: 36.09%
Min: 0.00%

MUFG’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 65.29% is within the typical range for the Banks industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

Symbol	MET	MUFG
Dividend Yield (TTM)	3.17%	2.07%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)	39.96%	65.29%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

MET

12.61

Insurance Industry

Max: 30.75
Q3: 18.11
Median: 12.67
Q1: 9.66
Min: 2.87

MET’s P/E Ratio of 12.61 is within the middle range for the Insurance industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

MUFG

13.88

Banks Industry

Max: 22.69
Q3: 13.75
Median: 10.32
Q1: 7.73
Min: 2.59

A P/E Ratio of 13.88 places MUFG in the upper quartile for the Banks industry. This high valuation relative to peers suggests the market holds elevated expectations for the company’s future growth.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

MET

0.74

Insurance Industry

Max: 3.41
Q3: 1.88
Median: 1.22
Q1: 0.80
Min: 0.23

In the lower quartile for the Insurance industry, MET’s P/S Ratio of 0.74 indicates its revenue is valued more conservatively than most of its peers. This could present a compelling opportunity if the market has overlooked its sales-generating capabilities.

MUFG

2.18

Banks Industry

Max: 4.90
Q3: 2.98
Median: 2.24
Q1: 1.59
Min: 0.45

The P/S Ratio is often not a primary valuation tool in the Banks industry.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

MET

1.95

Insurance Industry

Max: 4.57
Q3: 2.56
Median: 1.88
Q1: 1.20
Min: 0.17

MET’s P/B Ratio of 1.95 is within the conventional range for the Insurance industry. This shows a balanced market view, where the stock’s price is neither at a significant premium nor a discount to the book value of its peers.

MUFG

1.20

Banks Industry

Max: 2.09
Q3: 1.40
Median: 1.11
Q1: 0.86
Min: 0.29

MUFG’s P/B Ratio of 1.20 is within the conventional range for the Banks industry. This shows a balanced market view, where the stock’s price is neither at a significant premium nor a discount to the book value of its peers.

MET vs. MUFG: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Insurance and Banks industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

Symbol	MET	MUFG
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)	12.61	13.88
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)	0.74	2.18
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)	1.95	1.20
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)	3.55	4.49