Computed head-to-head · 6 dimensions

GLAD vs MET

Gladstone Capital Corporation versus MetLife Inc. — yield, safety, growth trend, cost, scale, and tax treatment.

MET wins 4–1 on our six-dimension comparison, but GLAD can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.

Scorecard at a glance

Dimension	GLAD	MET	Winner
Yield	9.69%	2.92%	GLAD wins
Dividend safety	3.0/10	8.3/10	MET wins
Growth trend	+1.46% vs 5y	-0.03% vs 5y	MET wins
Volatility (beta)	0.92	0.73	MET wins
Scale	$428M	$50.6B	MET wins
Tax efficiency	Qualified-eligible	Qualified-eligible	Tie
Overall	1 wins	4 wins	MET wins

Dimension by dimension

GLAD wins on yield (9.69% vs 2.92%)

On a $10,000 investment that's about $677 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.

GLAD's higher yield (9.69%) looks attractive but investors should weigh whether the extra income compensates for any additional risk versus MET's 2.92% — especially if the higher yield is driven by covered calls or a falling share price.

GLAD: 9.69%MET: 2.92%

MET wins on safety (8.3/10 vs 3.0/10)

Our score combines yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size. MET scores better on the weighted average of those factors.

MET (8.3/10) scores 5.3 points higher than GLAD (3.0/10). A higher safety score means lower historical indicators of dividend cut risk — payout ratio, yield zone, and trend all factor in.

GLAD: 3.0/10MET: 8.3/10

MET shows healthier dividend-vs-price trend

MET's yield is 0.03% below its 5y average, versus 1.46% for GLAD. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.

GLAD: +1.46% vs 5yMET: -0.03% vs 5y

MET is less volatile (beta 0.73 vs 0.92)

Lower beta means smaller swings vs the S&P 500 — generally a steadier hold for income investors.

GLAD: 0.92MET: 0.73

MET is 118.2× larger by market cap

Larger companies tend to have tighter spreads, deeper liquidity, and lower closure risk.

GLAD: $428MMET: $50.6B

Both pay qualified-dividend-eligible distributions

Neither is structurally flagged for ordinary-income tax treatment. Most distributions should qualify for the lower long-term capital gains rate if holding-period requirements are met.

GLAD: Qualified-eligibleMET: Qualified-eligible

How we compare these

Every comparison on this page is computed from current public data, not written by hand. Yield comes from the most recent dividend distribution annualized over current price. Safety scores combine yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size — see our methodology for the exact formula. Tax-efficiency flags identify covered-call ETFs, REITs, and mREITs which distribute primarily as ordinary income.

This is educational, not investment advice.Scores reflect a snapshot of public data on the "as of" dates shown on each ticker's safety page. Verify on the issuer's investor relations page or your brokerage before making decisions.

Frequently asked

Which is better for income, GLAD or MET?

MET wins 4–1 on our six-dimension comparison, but GLAD can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.

GLAD vs MET: which has a higher dividend yield?

GLAD yields 9.69% and MET yields 2.92%. On a $10,000 investment that's about $677 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.

Is GLAD or MET a safer dividend in 2026?

GLAD scores 3.0/10 (Risky) on the Infnits dividend safety scale. MET scores 8.3/10 (Strong). MET is the safer pick on our scoring model.

Which has better dividend growth, GLAD or MET?