Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AMG scored 82.0, TY scored 76.0 — AMG leads.
Compare another set
AMG
Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.
Asset Management · Financial strength
74.4Fin
$374.16 · $9.7B
fundamentals as of
Strength gap
11.1
TY leads
TY
Tri-Continental Corporation
Asset Management · Financial strength
85.5Fin
$34.62 · $1.8B
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestTY5.5x
Fastest growthAMG+1.6%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AMG
TY
+1.6%C
Rev
-20.7%F
13.1xB
P/E
5.5xA
24.3%A-
ROE
16.7%B+
3.27C
P/B
0.91A-
0.0%C
Yield
3.4%B
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
The companies
AMGAffiliated Managers Group, Inc.
Asset Management · $374.16 · beta 1.07
Why now
Asset Management · market cap $9.7b. 5% off the 52-week high of $395.00. PEG 0.65 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 7 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $440.43 (implying +18% upside).
Moat
Net margin 38% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 24% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Credit-cycle exposure — provisions tend to lag actual loan deterioration by 2-3 quarters; a sharp uptick in net charge-offs is a leading indicator the market often misses until it's already priced.
TYTri-Continental Corporation
Asset Management · $34.62 · beta 0.85
Why now
Asset Management · market cap $1.8b. 5% off the 52-week high of $36.55. Revenue -21% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating.
Moat
ROE 17% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Revenue contracting -21% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. P/S 26.7x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. Balance-sheet financial — book value, net interest margin, and credit loss provisions are the lever points; a rates regime change or a deterioration in the loan book moves the stock more than EPS does.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Common questions
Is AMG or TY the better stock?
AMG scores higher: AMG 82.0, TY 76.0 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
How are AMG and TY scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.