PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BAM vs. L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

BAM vs. L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. (BAM) and Loews Corporation (L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAM achieves a -8.16% return, which is significantly lower than L's 2.79% return.


BAM

1D
1.09%
1M
-3.65%
YTD
-8.16%
6M
-10.55%
1Y
-10.49%
3Y*
16.64%
5Y*
10Y*

L

1D
0.70%
1M
2.83%
YTD
2.79%
6M
3.77%
1Y
22.24%
3Y*
22.56%
5Y*
14.36%
10Y*
11.24%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAM vs. L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
BAM
Brookfield Asset Management Ltd.
-8.16%-0.24%39.70%45.61%-10.80%
L
Loews Corporation
2.79%24.68%22.09%19.78%3.28%

Correlation

The correlation between BAM and L is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.17

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2022

0.31

The correlation between BAM and L shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (1 year) to 0.31 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

BAM:

$76.32B

L:

$22.30B

EPS

BAM:

$1.55

L:

$8.96

PE Ratio

BAM:

30.39

L:

12.06

PEG Ratio

BAM:

0.05

L:

0.71

PS Ratio

BAM:

15.08

L:

1.23

PB Ratio

BAM:

6.79

L:

1.19

Total Revenue (TTM)

BAM:

$5.08B

L:

$18.29B

Gross Profit (TTM)

BAM:

$3.26B

L:

$8.42B

EBITDA (TTM)

BAM:

$2.35B

L:

$2.64B

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

BAM vs. L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BAM
BAM Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
BAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAM Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
BAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAM Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank

L
L Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
L Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BAM vs. L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. (BAM) and Loews Corporation (L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


BAMLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.78

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.95

1.24

-0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.43

2.71

-3.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.77

6.93

-7.70

BAM vs. L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAM Sharpe Ratio is -0.44, which is lower than the L Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAM and L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

BAM vs. L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAM drawdown since its inception was -30.37%, smaller than the maximum L drawdown of -65.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAM and L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BAMLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.37%

-65.58%

+35.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-30.37%

-7.99%

-22.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.37%

-12.16%

-18.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-22.66%

-3.93%

-18.73%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.86%

-16.74%

+7.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

16.80%

3.11%

+13.69%

Volatility

BAM vs. L - Volatility Comparison

Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. (BAM) has a higher volatility of 10.83% compared to Loews Corporation (L) at 5.39%. This indicates that BAM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BAMLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.83%

5.39%

+5.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.75%

12.62%

+10.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

29.82%

16.08%

+13.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

30.18%

19.63%

+10.55%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.18%

25.65%

+4.53%

Dividends

BAM vs. L - Dividend Comparison

BAM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.99%, more than L's 0.23% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BAM
Brookfield Asset Management Ltd.
3.99%3.34%2.80%3.19%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
L
Loews Corporation
0.23%0.24%0.30%0.36%0.43%0.43%0.56%0.48%0.55%1.58%0.53%0.65%

Financials

BAM vs. L - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. and Loews Corporation. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


1.00B2.00B3.00B4.00B5.00B20222023202420252026
1.34B
4.56B
(BAM) Total Revenue
(L) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

BAM vs. L - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. and Loews Corporation over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

0.0%20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%100.0%202220232024202520260
52.3%
Portfolio components
BAM - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 1.34B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.

L - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Loews Corporation reported a gross profit of 2.38B and revenue of 4.56B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 52.3%.

BAM - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. reported an operating income of 0.00 and revenue of 1.34B, resulting in an operating margin of 0.0%.

L - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Loews Corporation reported an operating income of 539.00M and revenue of 4.56B, resulting in an operating margin of 11.8%.

BAM - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Brookfield Asset Management Ltd. reported a net income of 617.00M and revenue of 1.34B, resulting in a net margin of 46.1%.

L - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Loews Corporation reported a net income of 572.00M and revenue of 4.56B, resulting in a net margin of 12.6%.


Frequently Asked Questions


BAM and L have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BAM has higher volatility (10.83%) compared to L (5.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAM dropped -30.37% vs L's -65.58%.

L currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.35 vs -0.44), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BAM and L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer