Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
AMTB vs INDB vs WSFS vs OCFC vs TRMK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
AMTB vs INDB vs WSFS vs OCFC vs TRMK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $991M | $4.01B | $3.91B | $1.03B | $2.63B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $521M | $1.17B | $1.36B | $660M | $1.16B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $58M | $205M | $287M | $71M | $224M |
| Gross Margin | 55.6% | 67.9% | 74.7% | 54.8% | 64.7% |
| Operating Margin | 9.7% | 22.9% | 28.0% | 14.0% | 24.2% |
| Forward P/E | 13.1x | 11.1x | 11.8x | 9.5x | 11.4x |
| Total Debt | $1.04B | $901M | $303M | $1.63B | $1.12B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $470M | $230M | $1.33B | $135M | $668M |
AMTB vs INDB vs WSFS vs OCFC vs TRMK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amerant Bancorp Inc. (AMTB) | 100 | 156.9 | +56.9% |
| Independent Bank Co… (INDB) | 100 | 120.8 | +20.8% |
| WSFS Financial Corp… (WSFS) | 100 | 258.3 | +158.3% |
| OceanFirst Financia… (OCFC) | 100 | 102.3 | +2.3% |
| Trustmark Corporati… (TRMK) | 100 | 182.2 | +82.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AMTB vs INDB vs WSFS vs OCFC vs TRMK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AMTB is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 3.7% vs OCFC's 2.5%
INDB is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.85, yield 2.6%
WSFS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 136.5% 10Y total return vs TRMK's 119.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, Low D/E 11.1%, current ratio 0.08x
- PEG 0.68 vs OCFC's 3.41
- Beta 0.70 vs AMTB's 0.93, lower leverage
OCFC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Lower P/E (9.5x vs 11.4x)
- Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs AMTB's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- 4.7% yield, vs INDB's 2.6%
- Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs AMTB's 0.5%
TRMK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and defensive.
- Rev growth 34.8%, EPS growth 1.9%
- Beta 0.80, yield 2.2%, current ratio 0.73x
- 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs OCFC's -4.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs OCFC's -4.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.5x vs 11.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs AMTB's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs AMTB's 0.93, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.7% yield, vs INDB's 2.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +45.8% vs OCFC's +12.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs AMTB's 0.5% |
AMTB vs INDB vs WSFS vs OCFC vs TRMK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
AMTB vs INDB vs WSFS vs OCFC vs TRMK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
WSFS leads in 4 of 6 categories
AMTB leads 0 • INDB leads 0 • OCFC leads 0 • TRMK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WSFS leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WSFS is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.4B annually — 2.6x AMTB's $521M. WSFS is the more profitable business, keeping 21.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to OCFC's 10.7%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $521M | $1.2B | $1.4B | $660M | $1.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $54M | $306M | $408M | $103M | $323M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $58M | $205M | $287M | $71M | $224M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $111M | $248M | $214M | $80M | $230M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +55.6% | +67.9% | +74.7% | +54.8% | +64.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.7% | +22.9% | +28.0% | +14.0% | +24.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.2% | +17.6% | +21.1% | +10.7% | +19.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +21.4% | +21.2% | +15.7% | +12.0% | +19.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +57.1% | -31.7% | +22.9% | -36.1% | +5.4% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — AMTB and WSFS and OCFC each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.1x trailing earnings, TRMK trades at a 36% valuation discount to AMTB's 18.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), WSFS offers better value at 0.83x vs OCFC's 5.54x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $991M | $4.0B | $3.9B | $1.0B | $2.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.6B | $4.7B | $2.9B | $2.5B | $3.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 18.73x | 18.21x | 14.57x | 15.41x | 12.07x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.13x | 11.10x | 11.85x | 9.48x | 11.44x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.44x | 0.83x | 5.54x | 1.50x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 22.07x | 15.29x | 7.07x | 27.17x | 9.45x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.51x | 3.44x | 2.88x | 1.58x | 2.35x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.03x | 1.12x | 1.48x | 0.62x | 1.27x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 10.12x | 16.74x | 18.30x | 13.02x | 11.34x |
Profitability & Efficiency
WSFS leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TRMK delivers a 10.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $4 for OCFC. WSFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AMTB's 1.11x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AMTB scores 7/9 vs OCFC's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.3% | +6.2% | +10.6% | +4.3% | +10.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.7% | +0.9% | +1.4% | +0.5% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.6% | +4.9% | +9.5% | +2.2% | +7.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.2% | +1.9% | +10.3% | +2.7% | +3.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.11x | 0.25x | 0.11x | 0.98x | 0.53x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $571M | $671M | -$1.0B | $1.5B | $448M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $470M | $230M | $1.3B | $135M | $668M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.0B | $901M | $303M | $1.6B | $1.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.29x | 0.85x | 1.30x | 0.33x | 0.75x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WSFS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in WSFS five years ago would be worth $16,350 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,761 for OCFC. Over the past 12 months, WSFS leads with a +45.8% total return vs OCFC's +12.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TRMK at 29.2% vs OCFC's 8.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +20.6% | +11.6% | +35.3% | +3.3% | +15.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +44.5% | +36.2% | +45.8% | +12.3% | +34.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +28.9% | +80.9% | +103.1% | +26.0% | +115.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +22.7% | +22.0% | +63.5% | +7.6% | +62.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +40.4% | +118.3% | +136.5% | +34.3% | +119.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +8.8% | +21.9% | +26.6% | +8.0% | +29.2% |
Risk & Volatility
WSFS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WSFS is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AMTB's 0.93 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WSFS currently trades 97.7% from its 52-week high vs OCFC's 87.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.93x | 0.85x | 0.70x | 0.83x | 0.80x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.38 | $87.00 | $75.86 | $20.61 | $46.34 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.62 | $57.01 | $49.92 | $16.09 | $33.39 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.8% | +93.2% | +97.7% | +87.5% | +96.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.4 | 55.5 | 56.5 | 45.5 | 48.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 226K | 328K | 370K | 804K | 349K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — INDB and OCFC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AMTB as "Hold", INDB as "Hold", WSFS as "Hold", OCFC as "Hold", TRMK as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 15.2% upside for INDB (target: $93) vs 1.7% for AMTB (target: $24). For income investors, OCFC offers the higher dividend yield at 4.66% vs WSFS's 0.92%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $24.00 | $93.33 | $79.00 | $19.00 | $45.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 15 | 13 | 8 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.2% | +2.6% | +0.9% | +4.7% | +2.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 15 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.28 | $2.10 | $0.68 | $0.84 | $0.97 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.0% | +1.6% | +7.4% | +7.9% | +3.0% |
WSFS leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 2 categories are tied.
AMTB vs INDB vs WSFS vs OCFC vs TRMK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AMTB or INDB or WSFS or OCFC or TRMK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is the stronger pick with 34.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 7% for OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC). Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) offers the better valuation at 12. 1x trailing P/E (11. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Amerant Bancorp Inc. (AMTB) a "Hold" — based on 7 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 — AMTB or INDB or WSFS or OCFC or TRMK?
On trailing P/E, Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is the cheapest at 12.
1x versus Amerant Bancorp Inc. at 18. 7x. On forward P/E, OceanFirst Financial Corp. is actually cheaper at 9. 5x — 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: WSFS Financial Corporation wins at 0. 68x versus OceanFirst Financial Corp. 's 3. 41x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AMTB or INDB or WSFS or OCFC or TRMK?
Over the past 5 years, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) delivered a total return of +63.
5%, compared to +7. 6% for OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WSFS returned +136. 5% versus OCFC's +34. 3%. 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 — AMTB or INDB or WSFS or OCFC or TRMK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
70β versus Amerant Bancorp Inc. 's 0. 93β — meaning AMTB is approximately 33% more volatile than WSFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 111% for Amerant Bancorp Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AMTB or INDB or WSFS or OCFC or TRMK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is pulling ahead at 34.
8% versus -4. 7% for OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amerant Bancorp Inc. grew EPS 386. 4% year-over-year, compared to -29. 1% for OceanFirst 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.
06Which has better profit margins — AMTB or INDB or WSFS or OCFC or TRMK?
WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the more profitable company, earning 21.
1% net margin versus 8. 0% for Amerant Bancorp Inc. — meaning it keeps 21. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WSFS leads at 28. 0% versus 10. 1% for AMTB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WSFS leads at 74. 7%, 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 AMTB or INDB or WSFS or OCFC or TRMK 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, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 68x versus OceanFirst Financial Corp. 's 3. 41x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC) trades at 9. 5x forward P/E versus 13. 1x for Amerant Bancorp Inc. — 3. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for INDB: 15. 2% to $93. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — AMTB or INDB or WSFS or OCFC or TRMK?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC) offers the highest yield at 4. 7%, versus 0. 9% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS).
09Is AMTB or INDB or WSFS or OCFC or TRMK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
70), 0. 9% yield, +136. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WSFS: +136. 5%, AMTB: +40. 4%), 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 AMTB and INDB and WSFS and OCFC and TRMK?
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: AMTB is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INDB is a small-cap high-growth stock; WSFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; OCFC is a small-cap deep-value stock; TRMK is a small-cap high-growth 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.