MFC vs. NMR
MFC (Manulife Financial Corporation) and NMR (Nomura Holdings, Inc.) are both stocks. Both are in the Financial Services sector — MFC in Insurance - Life, NMR in Capital Markets. Over the past 10 years, MFC returned 15.88%/yr vs 10.27%/yr for NMR. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
MFC vs. NMR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MFC achieves a 9.27% return, which is significantly higher than NMR's 2.26% return. Over the past 10 years, MFC has outperformed NMR with an annualized return of 15.88%, while NMR has yielded a comparatively lower 10.27% annualized return.
MFC
- 1D
- 0.46%
- 1M
- -1.92%
- YTD
- 9.27%
- 6M
- 13.46%
- 1Y
- 24.59%
- 3Y*
- 32.27%
- 5Y*
- 19.18%
- 10Y*
- 15.88%
NMR
- 1D
- 2.02%
- 1M
- 7.92%
- YTD
- 2.26%
- 6M
- 10.00%
- 1Y
- 40.79%
- 3Y*
- 37.17%
- 5Y*
- 13.07%
- 10Y*
- 10.27%
MFC vs. NMR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFC Manulife Financial Corporation | 9.27% | 22.95% | 45.75% | 31.13% | -1.18% | 12.17% | -7.18% | 49.19% | -29.89% | 22.17% |
NMR Nomura Holdings, Inc. | 2.26% | 54.10% | 34.05% | 21.84% | -10.28% | -18.76% | 4.39% | 38.71% | -36.08% | 0.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between MFC and NMR is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 1999 | 0.35 |
The correlation between MFC and NMR shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (all time) to 0.47 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
MFC:
$46.97B
NMR:
$26.11B
MFC:
$4.06
NMR:
$118.76
MFC:
9.59
NMR:
0.07
MFC:
3.36
NMR:
0.00
MFC:
0.78
NMR:
0.01
MFC:
1.07
NMR:
0.01
MFC:
$79.35B
NMR:
$4.76T
MFC:
$26.46B
NMR:
$2.17T
MFC:
$8.26B
NMR:
$608.09B
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
MFC vs. NMR — Risk / Return Rank
MFC
NMR
MFC vs. NMR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Manulife Financial Corporation (MFC) and Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR). 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.
| MFC | NMR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.19 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.25 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.98 | 1.83 | +0.15 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.41 | 4.67 | +0.75 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MFC | NMR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.19 | 1.39 | -0.19 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 | 0.44 | +0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 | 0.34 | +0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.34 | -0.00 | +0.35 |
Drawdowns
MFC vs. NMR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MFC drawdown since its inception was -83.61%, smaller than the maximum NMR drawdown of -89.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFC and NMR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MFC | NMR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -83.61% | -89.27% | +5.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.49% | -22.43% | +9.94% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.75% | -26.34% | +9.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.99% | -42.87% | +15.88% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -57.44% | -55.34% | -2.10% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.95% | -57.85% | +55.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.41% | -61.51% | +32.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.64% | 8.77% | -4.13% |
Volatility
MFC vs. NMR - Volatility Comparison
Manulife Financial Corporation (MFC) has a higher volatility of 7.84% compared to Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) at 6.72%. This indicates that MFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NMR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MFC | NMR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.84% | 6.72% | +1.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.82% | 22.62% | -6.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.72% | 29.56% | -8.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.13% | 29.68% | -5.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.42% | 30.71% | -2.29% |
Dividends
MFC vs. NMR - Dividend Comparison
MFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.43%, more than NMR's 2.03% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFC Manulife Financial Corporation | 3.43% | 3.45% | 4.16% | 4.86% | 5.71% | 4.91% | 4.70% | 3.71% | 4.08% | 3.93% | 4.15% | 5.38% |
NMR Nomura Holdings, Inc. | 2.03% | 4.91% | 4.29% | 1.20% | 3.86% | 0.00% | 0.86% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.70% | 1.79% | 3.34% |
Financials
MFC vs. NMR - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Manulife Financial Corporation and Nomura Holdings, Inc.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
MFC vs. NMR - Profitability Comparison
MFC - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Manulife Financial Corporation reported a gross profit of 12.31B and revenue of 12.31B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 100.0%.
NMR - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Nomura Holdings, Inc. reported a gross profit of 723.15B and revenue of 1.36T. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 53.2%.
MFC - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Manulife Financial Corporation reported an operating income of 1.47B and revenue of 12.31B, resulting in an operating margin of 11.9%.
NMR - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Nomura Holdings, Inc. reported an operating income of 107.67B and revenue of 1.36T, resulting in an operating margin of 7.9%.
MFC - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Manulife Financial Corporation reported a net income of 1.20B and revenue of 12.31B, resulting in a net margin of 9.7%.
NMR - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Nomura Holdings, Inc. reported a net income of 73.93B and revenue of 1.36T, resulting in a net margin of 5.4%.
Frequently Asked Questions
MFC and NMR have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MFC has higher volatility (7.84%) compared to NMR (6.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MFC dropped -83.61% vs NMR's -89.27%.
NMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.39 vs 1.19), 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.
Find the right allocation for MFC and NMR
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