CNO vs IWM
CNO Financial Group vs iShares Russell 2000 ETF — AI-powered side-by-side comparison
CNO
CNO Financial Group
54
Watch
VS
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
60
Insufficient Data
| Metric | CNO | IWM |
|---|
| AI Score |
54
|
60
|
| Price |
$53.52
|
$299.95
|
| P/E Ratio |
18.02×
|
—
|
| ROE |
8.7%
|
—
|
| Revenue Growth YoY |
—
|
—
|
| Gross Margin |
43.4%
|
—
|
| Debt / Equity |
1.76×
|
—
|
| Dividend Yield |
1.3%
|
—
|
| RSI (14) |
39.2
|
49.6
|
| Beta |
0.817
|
1.26
|
| Expected Upside |
—
|
+0.9%
|
AI Committee View
Current Innellis committee reasoning for CNO versus IWM.
IWM leads by 6 points.
IWM scores 60/100 (Insufficient Data) versus CNO at 54/100 (Watch).
CNO Committee View
50% agreement
6 analysts
The committee is genuinely divided. Macro Analyst sees a compelling case. Risk Analyst remains cautious — high leverage (debt-to-equity 1.54) amplifies downside in a stress scenario. This disagreement is itself the signal — the setup is not clean in either direction.
Bull Case
- 5 consecutive earnings beats -- consistent execution — Growth
- Quarter-over-quarter growth rate is ACCELERATING, not just positive — Growth
- Price structure making higher highs and higher lows — Technical
Bear Case
- Debt-to-equity of 1.54 adds balance-sheet risk to the value case — Value
- EPS declining -12.8% YoY despite any revenue growth — Growth
- MACD histogram negative -- bearish momentum — Technical
IWM Committee View
67% agreement
3 analysts
Supporting evidence favours the bullish case. Most analysts agree, and no major concerns are blocking a stronger rating.
Bull Case
- Price structure making higher highs and higher lows — Technical
- Weekly trend (uptrend) confirms the daily trend -- multi-timeframe agreement — Technical
Bear Case
- MACD histogram negative -- bearish momentum — Technical