vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Apollo Global Management (APO) and Hartford (The) (HIG), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Apollo Global Management is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($9.9B vs $388.0M, roughly 25.4× Hartford (The)). Hartford (The) runs the higher net margin — 6.9% vs 291.5%, a 284.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Apollo Global Management posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (86.7% vs 4.0%). Over the past eight quarters, Apollo Global Management's revenue compounded faster (18.4% CAGR vs 5.0%).
Apollo Global Management, Inc. is an American asset management firm that primarily invests in alternative assets. As of 2025, the company had $840 billion of assets under management, including $392 billion invested in credit, including mezzanine capital, hedge funds, non-performing loans, and collateralized loan obligations, $99 billion invested in private equity, and $46.2 billion invested in real assets, which includes real estate and infrastructure. The company invests money on behalf of p...
The Hartford Insurance Group, Inc., known as The Hartford, is a U.S.-based insurance company. The Hartford is a Fortune 500 company headquartered in its namesake city of Hartford, Connecticut. It was ranked 162nd in Fortune 500 in 2024. The Hartford is a leader in property and casualty insurance, employee benefits and mutual funds. With more than 200 years of expertise, The Hartford is widely recognized for its service excellence, sustainability practices, trust and integrity. It sells produc...
APO vs HIG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $9.9B | $388.0M |
| Net Profit | $684.0M | $1.1B |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 17.8% | — |
| Net Margin | 6.9% | 291.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 86.7% | 4.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | -54.0% | 32.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.09 | $3.96 |
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 | $9.9B | $388.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.8B | $386.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.8B | $366.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.5B | $366.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.3B | $373.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.8B | $369.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.0B | $364.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.0B | $352.0M |
| Q4 25 | $684.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $630.0M | $995.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $442.0M | $630.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.5B | $853.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $811.0M | $767.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $853.0M | $738.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | $753.0M |
| Q4 25 | 17.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 32.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.9% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 31.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | 6.9% | 291.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.7% | 279.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.2% | 271.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.0% | 172.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 28.1% | 228.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.4% | 207.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.2% | 202.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 20.3% | 213.9% |
| Q4 25 | $1.09 | $3.96 | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.78 | $3.77 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.99 | $3.44 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.68 | $2.15 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.41 | $2.88 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.29 | $2.56 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.35 | $2.44 | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.28 | $2.47 |
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 | $13.4B | $4.4B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $23.3B | $19.0B |
| Total Assets | $460.9B | $86.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.57× | 0.23× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $13.4B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.6B | $4.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.1B | $4.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.6B | $4.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.6B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $9.8B | $4.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.8B | $4.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.6B | $4.4B |
| Q4 25 | $23.3B | $19.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $23.1B | $18.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $19.3B | $17.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $18.0B | $16.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.3B | $16.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $17.9B | $17.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $15.3B | $15.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $14.8B | $15.5B |
| Q4 25 | $460.9B | $86.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $449.5B | $85.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $419.6B | $83.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $395.0B | $82.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $377.9B | $80.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $368.7B | $81.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $346.5B | $79.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $334.1B | $77.7B |
| Q4 25 | 0.57× | 0.23× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.55× | 0.24× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.63× | 0.25× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.59× | 0.26× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.61× | 0.27× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.55× | 0.26× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.64× | 0.28× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.65× | 0.28× |
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 | $4.7B | $1.8B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $1.8B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 454.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | 11.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 6.83× | 1.60× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $5.8B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $4.7B | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $303.0M | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $985.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-4.0M | $1.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9B | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $70.0M | $1.1B |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $947.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | 454.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 464.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 341.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 258.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 495.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 438.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 329.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 297.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 11.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 11.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 10.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 10.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 16.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 16.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 14.2% |
| Q4 25 | 6.83× | 1.60× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.17× | 1.70× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.00× | 1.30× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.29× | 1.56× | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.00× | 2.20× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.29× | 2.19× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.56× | 1.71× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.05× | 1.46× |
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
APO
| Retirement Services Segment | $8.5B | 86% |
| Asset Management1 | $681.0M | 7% |
| Principal Investing Segment | $624.0M | 6% |
| Management Service Incentive | $96.0M | 1% |
HIG
| Hartford Funds | $292.0M | 75% |
| Other | $77.0M | 20% |
| Property Casualty Other Operations | $19.0M | 5% |
