Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
NBHC vs CVBF
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
NBHC vs CVBF — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $1.67B | $2.88B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $584M | $644M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $110M | $209M |
| Gross Margin | 69.2% | 79.7% |
| Operating Margin | 24.4% | 43.7% |
| Forward P/E | 12.6x | 14.7x |
| Total Debt | $72M | $991M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $417M | $108M |
NBHC vs CVBF — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| National Bank Holdi… (NBHC) | 100 | 162.0 | +62.0% |
| CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) | 100 | 113.3 | +13.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NBHC vs CVBF
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NBHC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth -1.7%, EPS growth -7.5%
- 151.6% 10Y total return vs CVBF's 66.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.84, Low D/E 5.2%, current ratio 0.27x
CVBF is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.81, yield 3.8%
- Beta 0.81, yield 3.8%, current ratio 0.01x
- Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBHC's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | -1.7% NII/revenue growth vs CVBF's -2.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.6x vs 14.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBHC's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.81 vs NBHC's 0.84 | |
| Dividends | 2.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs CVBF's 3.8% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +21.3% vs CVBF's +16.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBHC's 0.4% |
NBHC vs CVBF — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
NBHC vs CVBF — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CVBF leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CVBF and NBHC operate at a comparable scale, with $644M and $584M in trailing revenue. CVBF is the more profitable business, keeping 32.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NBHC's 18.8%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $584M | $644M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $165M | $294M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $110M | $209M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $114M | $217M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +69.2% | +79.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +24.4% | +43.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +18.8% | +32.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +19.6% | +33.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -42.5% | +11.1% |
Valuation Metrics
NBHC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.0x trailing earnings, CVBF trades at a 9% valuation discount to NBHC's 15.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, NBHC's 8.1x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than CVBF's 13.4x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.7B | $2.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.3B | $3.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.35x | 13.97x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.61x | 14.74x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.40x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.05x | 13.37x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.86x | 4.48x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.21x | 1.26x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 12.60x | 13.26x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NBHC leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CVBF delivers a 9.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $8 for NBHC. NBHC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CVBF's 0.43x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NBHC scores 7/9 vs CVBF's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.1% | +9.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.1% | +1.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.4% | +6.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.6% | +9.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.05x | 0.43x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$345M | $883M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $417M | $108M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $72M | $991M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.83x | 2.12x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NBHC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NBHC five years ago would be worth $12,505 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,522 for CVBF. Over the past 12 months, NBHC leads with a +21.3% total return vs CVBF's +16.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CVBF at 18.0% vs NBHC's 13.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +17.1% | +14.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +21.3% | +16.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +45.0% | +64.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +25.1% | +15.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +151.6% | +66.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +13.2% | +18.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NBHC and CVBF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CVBF is the less volatile stock with a 0.81 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NBHC's 0.84 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.84x | 0.81x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $44.02 | $21.48 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $35.06 | $17.95 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.4% | +98.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.5 | 60.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 295K | 1.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NBHC and CVBF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates NBHC as "Hold" and CVBF as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 18.9% upside for NBHC (target: $52) vs 16.6% for CVBF (target: $25). For income investors, CVBF offers the higher dividend yield at 3.85% vs NBHC's 2.76%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $52.00 | $24.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 16 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.8% | +3.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 10 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.21 | $0.82 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.9% | +2.8% |
NBHC leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). CVBF leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
NBHC vs CVBF: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NBHC or CVBF a better buy right now?
For growth investors, National Bank Holdings Corporation (NBHC) is the stronger pick with -1.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 3% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) offers the better valuation at 14. 0x trailing P/E (14. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate National Bank Holdings Corporation (NBHC) a "Hold" — based on 10 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — NBHC or CVBF?
On trailing P/E, CVB Financial Corp.
(CVBF) is the cheapest at 14. 0x versus National Bank Holdings Corporation at 15. 3x. On forward P/E, National Bank Holdings Corporation is actually cheaper at 12. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NBHC or CVBF?
Over the past 5 years, National Bank Holdings Corporation (NBHC) delivered a total return of +25.
1%, compared to +15. 2% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NBHC returned +151. 6% versus CVBF's +66. 9%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — NBHC or CVBF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CVB Financial Corp.
(CVBF) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 81β versus National Bank Holdings Corporation's 0. 84β — meaning NBHC is approximately 4% more volatile than CVBF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, National Bank Holdings Corporation (NBHC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 43% for CVB Financial Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NBHC or CVBF?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), National Bank Holdings Corporation (NBHC) is pulling ahead at -1.
7% versus -2. 3% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: CVB Financial Corp. grew EPS 5. 6% year-over-year, compared to -7. 5% for National Bank Holdings Corporation. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — NBHC or CVBF?
CVB Financial Corp.
(CVBF) is the more profitable company, earning 32. 5% net margin versus 18. 8% for National Bank Holdings Corporation — meaning it keeps 32. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CVBF leads at 43. 8% versus 24. 4% for NBHC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CVBF leads at 79. 9%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is NBHC or CVBF more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, National Bank Holdings Corporation (NBHC) trades at 12.
6x forward P/E versus 14. 7x for CVB Financial Corp. — 2. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NBHC: 18. 9% to $52. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NBHC or CVBF?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) offers the highest yield at 3. 8%, versus 2. 8% for National Bank Holdings Corporation (NBHC).
09Is NBHC or CVBF better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, National Bank Holdings Corporation (NBHC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
84), 2. 8% yield, +151. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NBHC: +151. 6%, CVBF: +66. 9%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between NBHC and CVBF?
Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.