Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.
How Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. stacks up
AJG · against 24 other Financial Services companies of similar size
Growth
67/ 100
Near the top of its peers.
Ranked #6 of 25 · scores higher than 75% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score11 peers with a growth score of 60–69, including AJG · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 67?
Weighted metrics compared with all Financial Services companies.Mainly thanks to its 3-year revenue growth and revenue growth, which are stronger than most Financial Services peers.
- slower growth in earnings per share: weaker than 64% of peers. Earnings per share growth: -4.5% vs peer median 10.0%
- faster revenue growth over three years: stronger than 76% of peers. 3-year revenue growth: 19.5% vs peer median 10.0%
- faster revenue growth over the last year: stronger than 76% of peers. Revenue growth: 26.3% vs peer median 7.4%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = AJG, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | AJG | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 25 reported | 26.3% | 10.6% | 79% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 25 reported | -4.5% | 25.2% | 21% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 24 reported | 19.5% | 11.9% | 83% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around AJG| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 88.7B USD | 84 | 39 | |
| 2 | 477.0B HKD (≈$61.1B) | 75 | 60 | |
| 3 | 81.4B USD | 72 | 54 | |
| 4 | 6.04T INR (≈$72.4B) | 70 | 60 | |
| 5 | 43.6B GBP (≈$56.7B) | 69 | 48 | |
| 6 | 70.1B USD | 67 | 45 | |
| 6 | 87.2B USD | 67 | 49 | |
| 8 | 70.0B USD | 65 | 53 | |
| 9 | 90.7B USD | 63 | 33 | |
| 9 | 197.1B BRL (≈$35.5B) | 63 | 60 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score