Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: MMC stock price vs LNC: inconclusive Relative valuation is incomplete for this pair. Review the available filing metrics before drawing a conclusion.
Quick read
Each company valued on the other's multiple, then compared with the market price.
Implied fair value · at LNC's multiple
Needs LNC P/E.
Implied fair value · at MMC's multiple
Needs MMC P/E.
Price unavailable
Metric by metric
Where each company leads, and how wide the gap is.
Growth edge
Reported gross margin
Operating income + D&A
Lower is better
Not comparable
Lower leverage
Statements
Annual statements in reported currencies, with calculations and source evidence.
Values retain reported currencies and share bases. Select a figure to inspect its period, calculation and filing inputs. Differences require compatible units and periods.
Explore enterprise value and market valuation multiples in the valuation sections.
Trendline
Eight period-end years of reported revenue, earnings, and margins. Periods and currencies are shown with the data.
Price framework
USD market cap plus reported borrowing debt, less cash and equivalents. This EV proxy excludes investments, preferred stock and noncontrolling-interest adjustments.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Price framework
The same filing-backed model used on each company's valuation page, with company-specific inputs and calculated scenarios.
MARSH & MCLENNAN COMPANIES, INC. · implied price per share
Bear
$76.37
Base
$95.86
Bull
$121.24
LINCOLN NATIONAL CORPORATION · implied price per share
Five annual free-cash-flow observations are required for the filing-backed baseline.
Balance sheet health
Inspect reported liquidity and leverage alongside historical financial-health checks.
Financial strength on a 0–9 scale.
Bankruptcy-risk signal from balance sheet and earnings power.
Not enough data to score either balance sheet.
Comparable set
Where the pair sits against the wider comparable set.
Keep comparing
Open adjacent comparisons from the same industry to pressure-test the read across multiple pairs.
Aon plc
MMC vs AON
Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.
MMC vs AJG
BROWN & BROWN, INC.
MMC vs BRO
AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC.
MMC vs AIG
Accenture plc
MMC vs ACN
ROBERT HALF INC.
MMC vs RHI
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL INC
MMC vs PRU
METLIFE INC
MMC vs MET
AFLAC INC
MMC vs AFL
Jackson Financial Inc.
MMC vs JXN
Cash excludes investments. EBITDA is an operating-income-plus-D&A proxy. Missing borrowing categories remain unavailable; select a value to inspect its inputs.
LLM-powered synthesis
An explanation of the financial evidence. Check its snapshot date against the figures above.
This explanation uses an earlier data snapshot or evidence version. Review its generation date and the current figures, or refresh after signing in.
If you believe MMC can sustain double-digit revenue growth and its 34.5% ROIC, then MMC looks more attractive than LNC because the operating quality gap is wide despite limited direct pricing evidence.
MMC is valued using an implied P/E price of $66.66, while LNC trades on a much lower reported P/E of 7.9x and P/S of 0.5x, indicating the market is assigning MMC a quality premium relative to LNC. The wide LNC-implied valuation range of $27.40 to $3974.94 and DCF range of $112.74 to $152.53 suggest valuation sensitivity is high and the comparison is not clean because several LNC enterprise-value metrics are negative or unavailable.
Supporting Metrics
