SNV vs UMBF vs WTFC

For growth investors, UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) is the stronger pick with 68.

5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 2% for Synovus Financial Corp. (SNV). Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) offers the better valuation at 13. 3x trailing P/E (11. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Synovus Financial Corp. (SNV) a "Buy" — based on 32 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.

On trailing P/E, Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) is the cheapest at 13.

3x versus Synovus Financial Corp. at 16. 5x. On forward P/E, Synovus Financial Corp. is actually cheaper at 8. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Wintrust Financial Corporation wins at 0. 59x versus UMB Financial Corporation's 1. 17x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) delivered a total return of +106.

0%, compared to +16. 0% for Synovus Financial Corp. (SNV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WTFC returned +227. 7% versus SNV's +106. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

16β versus Synovus Financial Corp. 's 1. 25β — meaning SNV is approximately 8% more volatile than WTFC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Synovus Financial Corp. (SNV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 35% versus 62% for Wintrust Financial Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) is pulling ahead at 68.

5% versus 1. 2% for Synovus Financial Corp. (SNV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Wintrust Financial Corporation grew EPS 12. 1% year-over-year, compared to -12. 4% for Synovus Financial Corp.. 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.

Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) is the more profitable company, earning 19.

5% net margin versus 14. 1% for Synovus Financial Corp. — meaning it keeps 19. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WTFC leads at 26. 4% versus 17. 7% for SNV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WTFC leads at 62. 2%, 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.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 59x versus UMB Financial Corporation's 1. 17x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Synovus Financial Corp. (SNV) trades at 8. 9x forward P/E versus 11. 8x for Wintrust Financial Corporation — 2. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SNV: 39. 9% to $70. 00.

In this comparison, SNV (3.

0% yield), UMBF (1. 3% yield) pay a dividend. WTFC does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.

19), 1. 3% yield, +169. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UMBF: +169. 5%, WTFC: +227. 7%), 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.

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.

In terms of investment character: SNV is a small-cap deep-value stock; UMBF is a mid-cap high-growth stock; WTFC is a mid-cap deep-value stock. SNV, UMBF pay a dividend while WTFC does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.