Hannover Rück SE holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across growth and stability. SCOR SE still has the edge on valuation, 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.
Most of the lead runs through growth, while stability helps make the separation broader. The overall score gap is 19 points in favour of Hannover Rück SE.
Both operate in: Insurance - Reinsurance
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. HNR1.DE and SCR.PA share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how Hannover Rück SE and SCOR SE each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
Score differences across key dimensions.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Hannover Rück SE holds the stronger structural profile, but the price setup still leans toward SCOR SE.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
One company is still expanding while the other is contracting, which creates a very wide growth split.
Absolute pricing still looks more supportive for SCOR SE, with a forward P/E that is 4.6 turns lower there.
The lead is built on both growth and stability — though valuation still provides a counterweight.
Break down the HNR1.DE vs SCR.PA comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how HNR1.DE and SCR.PA 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.
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.