Home Compare AGS.BR vs KEY
Stock Comparison · Comparison

ageas SA/ vs Key: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

KeyCorp holds the cleaner structural position, with growth as the main driver and stability adding further support. ageas / still leads on valuation and stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup is mixed, without a decisive signal in either direction. The market is not adding a decisive signal either way — the structural read carries the weight.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.

Updated 2026-04-05

Most of the separation is still concentrated in growth.

Trajectory Similarity
0.66
Moderately similar
Peer-set rank: #12
within ageas SA/NV's functional peer set

This comparison is anchored in long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.

The pair shares a valid long-term profile match, but the trajectories are not especially close.

The strongest overlap appears in investment intensity and revenue stability.

Similarity drivers
investment intensityrevenue stability
What reduces the match
recent revenue growth
How to read the score
0.85–1.00 · Very similar0.70–0.84 · Similar0.55–0.69 · Moderately similarbelow 0.55 · Loose match
Peer-Relative Score
AGS.BR
ageas SA/NV
47
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
vs
KEY
KeyCorp
54
Peer-Score
Signal qualityHigh

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

Score differences across key dimensions.

Dimension spread: AGS.BR vs KEY Profitability 14 25 Stability 46 25 Valuation 85 70 Growth 37 100 AGS.BR KEY
Gap Ranking
#1 Growth +63
#2 Stability +21
#3 Valuation +15
#4 Profitability +11
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for AGS.BR and KEY Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer AGS.BRKEY Relative valuation Structural strength

Neither company combines the stronger profile with the cheaper valuation.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Growth
On growth, KeyCorp ranks near the top of the group; ageas SA/NV sits in the weaker half.
Stability
Stability also leans toward ageas SA/NV, reinforcing the broader structural lead.
Growth — Dominant Gap
AGS.BR
37
KEY
100
Gap+63in favour of KEY

Growth adds another layer to the lead, with a very wide gap in revenue growth between the two companies.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Stability is the one area where ageas SA/NV still pushes back materially — it is the steadier name on this dimension, which keeps the result from reading as one-way.

What this means for the comparison

The growth edge is decisive, even though current pricing and stability still lean somewhat toward ageas SA/NV.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the AGS.BR vs KEY comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Other comparisons with conflicting dimension signals

Explore how AGS.BR and KEY each compare against other companies in their peer groups.

Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.

Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.

Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.