ACT vs AGO

Enact Holdings, Inc. vs Assured Guaranty Ltd. — Valuation Comparison 2026

ACT

Insurance - Specialty
Enact Holdings, Inc.
Quality
9.0
out of 10
Value Trap
Price
$42.11
Last close
Models
13/13
Active
VS

AGO

Insurance - Specialty
Assured Guaranty Ltd.
Quality
8.7
out of 10
Value Trap
18
SAFE
Price
$74.18
Last close
Models
11/13
Active

Model-by-Model Comparison

ModelType ACT Fair ValueACT Upside AGO Fair ValueAGO Upside
Bayesian DCF Intrinsic $78.03 +85.3% $181.33 +144.5%
Earnings Power Value Intrinsic $36.16 -14.1% $1.26 -98.3%
EROIC Spread Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
First Chicago Scenario $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Markov DDM Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
ML-RIV Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Dynamic NAV Asset-Based $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
PWERM Option-Based $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Regime Cross-Sectional Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Sentiment SOTP Hybrid $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
CUCE Ensemble Ensemble $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
FTNN Topology Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
RCMH-DCF Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
🔒

Unlock Full 13-Model Comparison

Access all valuation models for ACT vs AGO — including EROIC Spread, First Chicago, Markov DDM, PWERM, and 7 more.

Access Full Analysis — From $27/mo →

ACT vs AGO — Which Stock Is More Undervalued?

ACT scores higher with a 9.0/10 quality rating vs AGO's 8.7/10. Both stocks are analyzed daily using SEC EDGAR filings across 13 independent models.

Comparing Enact Holdings, Inc. (ACT) and Assured Guaranty Ltd. (AGO) across 13 institutional-grade valuation models reveals how each company's intrinsic value stacks up against its market price. CirclFi's engine processes SEC EDGAR 10-K and 10-Q filings, FRED macroeconomic data, and GDELT news sentiment to generate independent fair value estimates daily.

ACT currently trades at $42.11 with a QOC of 9.0/10, while AGO trades at $74.18 with a QOC of 8.7/10.

Both companies are analyzed with models spanning intrinsic (Bayesian DCF, EPV), scenario-based (First Chicago), regime-switching (Markov DDM, RCMH-DCF), machine learning (ML-RIV, FTNN Topology), and ensemble methods (CUCE).