Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Diversified
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $774M | $2.52B | $2.70B | $4.50B | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $330M | $902M | $1.16B | $1.89B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $27M | $169M | $224M | $392M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 70.6% | 73.6% | 64.7% | 67.4% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | 10.7% | 24.3% | 24.2% | 25.7% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | 10.3x | 11.5x | 11.8x | 11.5x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $441M | $327M | $1.12B | $1.30B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $67M | $185M | $668M | $271M | $343.34B |
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alerus Financial Co… (ALRS) | 100 | 153.3 | +53.3% |
| NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) | 100 | 156.6 | +56.6% |
| Trustmark Corporati… (TRMK) | 100 | 187.2 | +87.2% |
| Fulton Financial Co… (FULT) | 100 | 221.8 | +121.8% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ALRS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +44.4% vs NBTB's +18.3%
NBTB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.76, yield 3.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.76, Low D/E 17.3%, current ratio 1.60x
- Beta 0.76, yield 3.0%, current ratio 1.60x
- Beta 0.76 vs FULT's 0.99, lower leverage
TRMK is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and bank quality.
- Rev growth 34.8%, EPS growth 1.9%
- NIM 3.4% vs JPM's 2.2%
- 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs ALRS's -3.1%
FULT is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 3.3% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs ALRS's 2.7%
JPM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs TRMK's 127.3%
- PEG 0.81 vs NBTB's 1.64
- PEG 0.81 vs 1.46
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs ALRS's 0.6% (lower = leaner)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs ALRS's -3.1% | |
| Value | PEG 0.81 vs 1.46 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs ALRS's 0.6% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.76 vs FULT's 0.99, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.3% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs ALRS's 2.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +44.4% vs NBTB's +18.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs ALRS's 0.6% |
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
FULT leads 1 • NBTB leads 1 • ALRS leads 0 • TRMK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 848.5x ALRS's $330M. FULT is the more profitable business, keeping 20.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ALRS's 8.2%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $330M | $902M | $1.2B | $1.9B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $49M | $241M | $323M | $529M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $27M | $169M | $224M | $392M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $95M | $225M | $230M | $267M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.6% | +73.6% | +64.7% | +67.4% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.7% | +24.3% | +24.2% | +25.7% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +8.2% | +18.8% | +19.3% | +20.7% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +28.9% | +24.9% | +19.8% | +14.1% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +73.1% | +39.5% | +5.4% | +47.2% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
FULT leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.2x trailing earnings, FULT trades at a 75% valuation discount to ALRS's 44.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FULT offers better value at 0.80x vs NBTB's 2.06x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $774M | $2.5B | $2.7B | $4.5B | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $2.7B | $3.2B | $5.5B | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 44.56x | 14.47x | 12.41x | 11.23x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.33x | 11.54x | 11.75x | 11.49x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.06x | 1.54x | 0.80x | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 28.78x | 11.03x | 9.67x | 10.43x | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.36x | 2.90x | 2.41x | 2.38x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.38x | 1.29x | 1.31x | 1.23x | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 13.16x | 11.49x | 11.65x | 15.81x | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NBTB leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $5 for ALRS. NBTB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NBTB scores 7/9 vs JPM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +4.9% | +9.5% | +10.8% | +11.6% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.5% | +1.1% | +1.2% | +1.2% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.9% | +7.9% | +7.1% | +7.5% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.8% | +2.4% | +3.2% | +9.5% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.78x | 0.17x | 0.53x | 0.37x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $373M | $142M | $448M | $1.0B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $67M | $185M | $668M | $271M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $441M | $327M | $1.1B | $1.3B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.35x | 1.05x | 0.75x | 0.84x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,474 for ALRS. Over the past 12 months, ALRS leads with a +44.4% total return vs NBTB's +18.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs NBTB's 14.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +35.9% | +17.6% | +18.7% | +21.0% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +44.4% | +18.3% | +35.5% | +37.8% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +79.7% | +48.5% | +115.6% | +96.0% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.7% | +44.4% | +56.8% | +61.1% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +106.8% | +108.5% | +127.3% | +114.2% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +21.6% | +14.1% | +29.2% | +25.1% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ALRS and NBTB each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NBTB is the less volatile stock with a 0.76 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FULT's 0.99 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ALRS currently trades 99.8% from its 52-week high vs JPM's 95.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.79x | 0.76x | 0.82x | 0.99x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $30.35 | $48.27 | $46.03 | $23.48 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $20.26 | $39.20 | $33.39 | $16.60 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.8% | +99.8% | +99.7% | +99.5% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 71.4 | 63.1 | 60.1 | 68.1 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 154K | 266K | 330K | 1.7M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ALRS and FULT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ALRS as "Hold", NBTB as "Hold", TRMK as "Hold", FULT as "Hold", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 5.9% upside for JPM (target: $340) vs -5.1% for ALRS (target: $29). For income investors, FULT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.30% vs JPM's 1.86%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $28.75 | $46.00 | $45.50 | $23.50 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 10 | 9 | 20 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.7% | +3.0% | +2.1% | +3.3% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 33 | 13 | 1 | 5 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.81 | $1.43 | $0.97 | $0.77 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +0.4% | +3.0% | +1.5% | +3.9% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). FULT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is the stronger pick with 34.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for Alerus Financial Corporation (ALRS). Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) offers the better valuation at 11. 2x trailing P/E (11. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) a "Buy" — based on 61 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 — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or JPM?
On trailing P/E, Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) is the cheapest at 11.
2x versus Alerus Financial Corporation at 44. 6x. On forward P/E, Alerus Financial Corporation is actually cheaper at 10. 3x — 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: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus NBT Bancorp Inc. 's 1. 64x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to +4. 7% for Alerus Financial Corporation (ALRS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus ALRS's +106. 8%. 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 — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 76β versus Fulton Financial Corporation's 0. 99β — meaning FULT is approximately 30% more volatile than NBTB relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is pulling ahead at 34.
8% versus -3. 1% for Alerus Financial Corporation (ALRS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fulton Financial Corporation grew EPS 32. 5% year-over-year, compared to -18. 1% for Alerus Financial 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 — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or JPM?
Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) is the more profitable company, earning 20.
7% net margin versus 5. 3% for Alerus Financial Corporation — meaning it keeps 20. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 26. 0% versus 6. 9% for ALRS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NBTB leads at 72. 1%, 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 ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or JPM more undervalued right now?
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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus NBT Bancorp Inc. 's 1. 64x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Alerus Financial Corporation (ALRS) trades at 10. 3x forward P/E versus 14. 4x for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — 4. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for JPM: 5. 9% to $339. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or JPM?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) offers the highest yield at 3. 3%, versus 1. 9% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM).
09Is ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 94), 1. 9% yield, +465. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +465. 8%, FULT: +114. 2%), 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 ALRS and NBTB and TRMK and FULT and JPM?
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: ALRS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NBTB is a small-cap deep-value stock; TRMK is a small-cap high-growth stock; FULT is a small-cap deep-value stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. 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.