vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Ameriprise Financial (AMP) and M&T Bank (MTB), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Ameriprise Financial is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($5.0B vs $420.0M, roughly 12.0× M&T Bank). M&T Bank runs the higher net margin — 20.0% vs 180.7%, a 160.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Ameriprise Financial posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (8.6% vs 7.1%). Over the past eight quarters, Ameriprise Financial's revenue compounded faster (8.0% CAGR vs 7.0%).
Ameriprise Financial, Inc., through its subsidiaries, provides various financial products and services to individual and institutional clients in the United States and internationally. It operates through four segments: Advice & Wealth Management, Asset Management, Retirement & Protection Solutions, and Corporate & Other. The Advice & Wealth Management segment provides financial planning and advice; brokerage products and services for retail and institutional clients; discretionary and non-di...
M&T Bank Corporation is an American bank holding company headquartered in Buffalo, New York. It operates 950+ branches in 12 states and Washington D.C. across the Eastern United States, from Maine to Virginia. Until May 1998, the bank's holding company was named First Empire State Corporation.
AMP vs MTB — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $5.0B | $420.0M |
| Net Profit | $1.0B | $759.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 25.6% | — |
| Net Margin | 20.0% | 180.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 8.6% | 7.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -5.9% | 11.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $10.39 | $4.62 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $5.0B | $420.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.9B | $423.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.5B | $417.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.5B | $397.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.6B | $392.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.6B | $394.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.4B | $388.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.3B | $367.0M |
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $759.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $912.0M | $792.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $716.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $583.0M | $584.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $681.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $511.0M | $721.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $829.0M | $655.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $990.0M | $531.0M |
| Q4 25 | 25.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 30.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 15.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 29.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.9% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 28.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | 20.0% | 180.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.6% | 187.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 23.6% | 171.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.0% | 147.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 23.0% | 173.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.2% | 183.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.9% | 168.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 22.9% | 144.7% |
| Q4 25 | $10.39 | $4.62 | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.33 | $4.82 | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.73 | $4.24 | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.83 | $3.32 | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.57 | $3.87 | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.00 | $4.02 | ||
| Q2 24 | $8.02 | $3.73 | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.46 | $3.02 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $10.9B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $6.5B | $29.2B |
| Total Assets | $190.9B | $213.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.37× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | — | $10.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $12.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $12.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $10.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $12.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $11.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $11.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $11.4B |
| Q4 25 | $6.5B | $29.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.5B | $28.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.1B | $28.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.4B | $29.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.2B | $29.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.7B | $28.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.0B | $28.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.9B | $27.2B |
| Q4 25 | $190.9B | $213.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $190.1B | $211.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $184.9B | $211.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $179.1B | $210.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $181.4B | $208.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $186.0B | $211.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $179.7B | $208.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $179.8B | $215.1B |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.37× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.45× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.43× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.36× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.43× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.42× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $2.7B | $523.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $2.6B | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 52.0% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 0.9% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 2.65× | 0.69× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $8.2B | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $2.7B | $523.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $844.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | $635.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $383.0M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.0B | $-28.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | $608.0M |
| Q4 25 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $325.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.0B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | — |
| Q4 25 | 52.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 44.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 38.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 36.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 65.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 38.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 32.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.4% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | 2.65× | 0.69× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.42× | 1.26× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.66× | 1.18× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.89× | 1.09× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.36× | 2.46× | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.96× | -0.04× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.07× | 2.07× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.46× | 1.15× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AMP
Segment breakdown not available.
MTB
| Institutional Services And Wealth Management | $218.0M | 52% |
| Retail Banking | $126.0M | 30% |
| Deposit Account | $44.0M | 10% |
| Credit Card Merchant Discount | $20.0M | 5% |
| Other | $9.0M | 2% |
| Brokerage Services Income | $2.0M | 0% |
| Fiduciary And Trust | $1.0M | 0% |
