Quick verdict: APO vs BAM in 2026

In this comprehensive APO vs BAM stock comparison 2026, Brookfield Asset Management (BAM) edges out Apollo Global Management (APO) in more comparable metrics, particularly in growth and operational profitability. However, APO presents a significantly more attractive valuation profile and stronger analyst conviction. While BAM shows stronger revenue momentum and impressive margins, APO appears to offer a substantial value opportunity based on its DCF. Not investment advice.

APO vs BAM: key metrics side by side

Full side-by-side comparison of APO and BAM across valuation, profitability, growth and analyst sentiment. Data updated 2026-04-29.

APO vs BAM valuation comparison

When considering APO vs BAM fundamentals and valuation, Apollo Global Management (APO) appears significantly undervalued compared to Brookfield Asset Management (BAM) based on several key metrics. APO currently trades at a P/E ratio of 16.76x, which is notably lower than BAM’s 30.16x. This suggests that investors are willing to pay almost twice as much for each dollar of BAM’s earnings compared to APO’s, implying APO is a cheaper entry point based on trailing earnings. Similarly, APO’s price-to-book (P/B) ratio stands at 3.22x, considerably below BAM’s 8.43x, reinforcing the perception that APO is trading at a more attractive valuation relative to its assets.

The Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) analysis further accentuates APO’s valuation advantage, with a staggering indicated upside of +351.2%. This suggests a significant potential for price appreciation if the market eventually aligns with its intrinsic value. In stark contrast, BAM’s DCF indicates a downside of -10.3%, implying it may be overvalued based on its projected future cash flows. Given these figures, APO clearly emerges as the cheaper stock from a valuation perspective, offering a compelling case for value-oriented investors in 2026. This stark difference in DCF estimates highlights APO’s potential for substantial capital gains relative to BAM.

APO vs BAM growth comparison

In terms of growth, Brookfield Asset Management (BAM) demonstrates stronger top-line momentum compared to Apollo Global Management (APO). BAM recorded a year-over-year revenue growth of +23.1%, outpacing APO’s +16.0%. This indicates that BAM has been expanding its business at a faster rate, which could be appealing for investors prioritizing aggressive expansion and market share capture. While APO’s growth is respectable, BAM’s higher growth rate points to potentially stronger future revenue trajectories, assuming current trends persist.

Despite its smaller overall revenue base ($4.90B) compared to APO’s substantial $30.30B, BAM’s higher percentage growth signifies its ability to scale rapidly. This is further complemented by BAM’s superior operational margins, which can often be a byproduct of efficient growth. Looking ahead, if BAM can sustain its impressive revenue growth, it could continue to attract growth-focused investors, particularly given its robust profitability metrics that suggest this growth is also highly efficient. This stronger growth momentum positions BAM as a leader for investors seeking dynamic expansion in the financial services sector.

APO vs BAM profitability

When analyzing APO vs BAM profitability, Brookfield Asset Management (BAM) significantly outperforms Apollo Global Management (APO) across several key margin metrics. BAM boasts an impressive net margin of 51.52%, which is substantially higher than APO’s 14.79%. This indicates that BAM is far more efficient at converting its revenue into net income. Similarly, BAM’s EBITDA margin stands at 64.12%, dwarfing APO’s 34.61%, highlighting superior operational efficiency before considering depreciation, amortization, interest, and taxes. While ROE is N/A% for both companies, the robust margin performance of BAM suggests a much stronger core business profitability.

Despite BAM’s superior margins, APO presents a more attractive Free Cash Flow (FCF) yield. APO’s FCF yield is 7.55%, significantly higher than BAM’s 2.02%. This indicates that APO generates substantially more free cash flow relative to its market capitalization, which is crucial for funding dividends, share buybacks, or debt reduction. While BAM excels in turning revenue into profit, APO’s higher FCF yield suggests it generates more accessible cash for shareholders and internal reinvestment. Therefore, while BAM extracts more profit from each dollar of revenue, APO demonstrates stronger cash generation relative to its stock price, appealing to investors prioritizing cash flow.

Analyst ratings: APO vs BAM

Analyst sentiment leans more favorably towards Apollo Global Management (APO) in terms of buy ratings, while Brookfield Asset Management (BAM) offers a slightly higher potential price target upside. Out of 28 analysts covering APO, a robust 85.7% have issued a “Buy” rating, reflecting strong confidence in the company’s future prospects. The consensus target price for APO is $157.25, representing a potential upside of +27.3% from its current price of $123.57. This high percentage of buy ratings indicates widespread professional optimism for APO’s performance in 2026.

In contrast, Brookfield Asset Management (BAM) is covered by 20 analysts, with 45.0% recommending a “Buy.” While this is still a positive outlook, it’s considerably less enthusiastic than the sentiment for APO. However, BAM’s consensus target price of $61.83 suggests a potential upside of +33.0% from its current price of $46.49, which is slightly higher than APO’s projected upside. This implies that while fewer analysts are bullish on BAM, those who are see a greater percentage increase in its stock price. Overall, analysts clearly prefer APO in terms of conviction, though BAM offers a marginally better upside according to target prices.

Should I buy APO or BAM stock in 2026?

Deciding whether you should buy APO or BAM stock in 2026 depends heavily on your investment priorities. For growth-oriented investors, Brookfield Asset Management (BAM) presents a compelling case. BAM has demonstrated stronger year-over-year revenue growth at +23.1% compared to APO’s +16.0%. Furthermore, BAM exhibits significantly higher profitability with a net margin of 51.52% and an EBITDA margin of 64.12%, dwarfing APO’s respective 14.79% and 34.61%. This suggests BAM is not only growing faster but also operating with greater efficiency, potentially offering stronger future earnings momentum for investors focused on expansion.

For value investors, Apollo Global Management (APO) appears to be the more attractive option. APO’s valuation metrics are considerably more favorable, trading at a P/E ratio of 16.76x versus BAM’s 30.16x, and a P/B ratio of 3.22x compared to BAM’s 8.43x. Crucially, APO’s Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) model suggests a massive upside of +351.2%, indicating significant undervaluation, whereas BAM’s DCF shows a -10.3% downside. Additionally, APO boasts a superior Free Cash Flow (FCF) yield of 7.55% against BAM’s 2.02%, pointing to better cash generation relative to its stock price. These fundamentals and valuation aspects position APO as a stronger choice for those seeking a potentially undervalued asset with substantial upside.

When considering income, neither APO nor BAM stock is a primary choice for dividend investors in 2026, as both offer extremely low dividend yields. APO’s dividend yield is 0.02%, while BAM’s is only marginally higher at 0.04%. While BAM technically has a higher yield, the difference is negligible and neither stock can be considered a significant income-generating investment. Investors focusing on passive income should look elsewhere. Ultimately, your choice between APO and BAM in 2026 will hinge on whether you prioritize BAM’s stronger growth and operational margins, or APO’s more attractive valuation and robust FCF generation. This is not investment advice; always conduct your own thorough research.

More APO and BAM comparisons

APO full stock analysis · BAM full stock analysis · All stock comparisons

FAQ: APO vs BAM