Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Corebridge Financial, Inc.
How Corebridge Financial, Inc. stacks up
CRBG · against 48 other Financial Services companies of similar size
Growth
82/ 100
Near the top of its peers.
Ranked #11 of 49 · scores higher than 77% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score5 peers with a growth score of 80–89, including CRBG · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 82?
Weighted metrics compared with all Financial Services companies.Mainly thanks to its earnings per share growth and revenue growth, which are stronger than most Financial Services peers.
- slower revenue growth over three years: weaker than 82% of peers. 3-year revenue growth: -1.0% vs peer median 9.9%
- faster revenue growth over the last year: stronger than 79% of peers. Revenue growth: 29.8% vs peer median 7.5%
- Earnings per share turned from a loss to a profit. Earnings per share growth: — vs peer median 10.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = CRBG, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | CRBG | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 51 reported | 29.8% | 11.8% | 78% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 44 reported | Not reported | 18.1% | — | — | 33% |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 46 reported | -1.0% | 9.2% | 0% | 33% |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around CRBG| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.7B GBP (≈$21.7B) | 99 | 41 | |
| 2 | 231.1B SEK (≈$23.1B) | 98 | 84 | |
| 3 | 856.7B INR (≈$10.3B) | 97 | 59 | |
| 4 | 23.5B USD | 94 | 67 | |
| 4 | 18.3B USD | 94 | 56 | |
| 8 | 11.8B USD | 89 | 44 | |
| 9 |
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