We've heard calls over the years to break up Citigroup and Bank of America, but not Goldman Sachs, the mighty financial engine that has richly rewarded investors over the past decade. Now ProPublica suggests the idea might be worth considering.

"Investors prefer annuities to swing-for-the-fences profits. Compared with pure asset managers and investment banks that specialize in either advisory work or making markets, Goldman stock trades at a discount these days. Goldman's price-to-earnings ratio stands at less than 10, while Lazard (a pure advisory firm), Jefferies (a market maker) and BlackRock (an asset manager) trade at significantly higher multiples."

True, no one looks at Goldman as a classic growth stock. And dividends count for a lot when it comes to bank investors. So, perhaps the bank could really unlock the value of the firm by breaking itself into three pieces.

You would have to think that all three have a chance at faring well on their own, especially the market making firm and the advisory/investment banking firm. The asset manager might fare okay.

There may not be a lot of synergy holding the three units together. Some analysts might undertake a rigorous analysis of the issue. If there's a chance the stock will kick up to a permanently higher plane, perhaps the board will consider it. Certainly, it would be a way for a CEO to leave his stamp on the firm, or firms.

For more:
- here's the article

Related Articles:
Should Bank of America split itself apart?
Bank of America's Citigroup-like break up
Time to split CEO and Chairman roles at Goldman Sachs?
Still time to break up Citigroup?