vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Acadian Asset Management Inc. (AAMI) and アメリカン・インターナショナル・グループ (AII), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Acadian Asset Management Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($172.2M vs $68.1M, roughly 2.5× アメリカン・インターナショナル・グループ). アメリカン・インターナショナル・グループ runs the higher net margin — 20.2% vs 30.7%, a 10.5% gap on every dollar of revenue.
アカディアン・アセット・マネジメント株式会社は、米国マサチューセッツ州ボストンに本社を置く資産運用会社で、世界中の機関投資家や個人顧客に対して専門的な投資管理サービスを提供し、資産運用分野で確かな実績を持っています。
アメリカン・インターナショナル・グループ（AIG）はアメリカ発の多国籍金融保険グループで、世界80以上の国と地域で事業を展開しています。2023年時点の従業員数は2万5200人です。核心事業は一般保険、生命・退職給付サービスの3つの部門に分かれ、テクノロジーを活用した独立子会社も擁しています。
AAMI vs AII — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $172.2M | $68.1M |
| Net Profit | $34.7M | $20.9M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 33.3% | 43.0% |
| Net Margin | 20.2% | 30.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 2.6% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | -18.4% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.97 | $0.58 |
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 | $172.2M | $68.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $144.2M | $62.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $127.4M | $74.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $119.9M | $71.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $167.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $123.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $109.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $105.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | $34.7M | $20.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.1M | $13.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.1M | $27.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $20.1M | $38.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $42.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $16.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $14.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | 33.3% | 43.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.4% | 30.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.7% | 32.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 26.6% | 59.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 38.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 21.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.9% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 21.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | 20.2% | 30.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.5% | 21.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.9% | 36.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 16.8% | 53.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 25.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 13.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.1% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.8% | — |
| Q4 25 | $0.97 | $0.58 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.42 | $0.67 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.28 | $1.62 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.54 | $2.78 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.11 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.45 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.29 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.37 | — |
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 | — | $222.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $200.0M | $618.0K |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $337.0M |
| Total Assets | $677.0M | $1.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.00× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | — | $222.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $171.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $259.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $236.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $200.0M | $618.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $721.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $824.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $926.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $275.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $337.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $315.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $301.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $186.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $677.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $751.4M | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $672.3M | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $677.3M | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $703.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $555.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $533.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $544.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.00× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.00× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.00× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.00× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | $8.7M | $50.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $50.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 73.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | 0.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 0.25× | 2.41× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $133.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $8.7M | $50.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-23.9M | $-7.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $61.6M | $27.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-48.8M | $68.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-19.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $69.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $45.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-40.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $50.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-11.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $26.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $68.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 73.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -19.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 36.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 94.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 7.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.25× | 2.41× | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.58× | -0.57× | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.10× | 1.00× | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.43× | 1.79× | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.45× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.12× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.15× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.77× | — |
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.
