Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
AMTB vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Credit Services
Financial - Credit Services
Information Technology Services
Information Technology Services
Banks - Diversified
AMTB vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Financial - Credit Services | Financial - Credit Services | Information Technology Services | Information Technology Services | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $991M | $627.79B | $433.57B | $19.75B | $25.59B | $908.57B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $521M | $43.03B | $33.94B | $11.66B | $21.09B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $58M | $22.24B | $15.57B | $2.67B | $3.20B | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 55.6% | 81.3% | 83.0% | 37.6% | 60.8% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | 9.7% | 61.1% | 59.4% | 17.9% | 24.4% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | 13.1x | 24.9x | 24.9x | 6.1x | 5.9x | 14.6x |
| Total Debt | $1.04B | $25.17B | $19.00B | $4.01B | $29.12B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $470M | $20.15B | $10.57B | $599M | $798M | $343.34B |
AMTB vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs JPM — 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% |
| Visa Inc. (V) | 100 | 169.4 | +69.4% |
| Mastercard Incorpor… (MA) | 100 | 165.6 | +65.6% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 28.5 | -71.5% |
| Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) | 100 | 49.0 | -51.0% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 345.8 | +245.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AMTB vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AMTB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for bank quality.
- NIM 3.7% vs JPM's 2.2%
- +44.5% vs FISV's -70.3%
V is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, Low D/E 66.4%, current ratio 1.08x
- Beta 0.48, yield 0.7%, current ratio 1.08x
- 51.7% margin vs AMTB's 11.2%
- 0.7% yield, 18-year raise streak, vs FIS's 4.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
MA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 16.4%, EPS growth 18.9%
- 16.4% NII/revenue growth vs JPM's 3.3%
- Beta 0.44 vs AMTB's 0.93
- 29.5% ROA vs AMTB's 0.7%, ROIC 56.5% vs 2.6%
FIS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.57, yield 4.3%
FISV is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.17 vs V's 1.57
- Lower P/E (5.9x vs 14.6x), PEG 0.17 vs 0.83
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 481.2% 10Y total return vs MA's 438.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.4% NII/revenue growth vs JPM's 3.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (5.9x vs 14.6x), PEG 0.17 vs 0.83 | |
| Quality / Margins | 51.7% margin vs AMTB's 11.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.44 vs AMTB's 0.93 | |
| Dividends | 0.7% yield, 18-year raise streak, vs FIS's 4.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +44.5% vs FISV's -70.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 29.5% ROA vs AMTB's 0.7%, ROIC 56.5% vs 2.6% |
AMTB vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
AMTB vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FISV leads in 1 of 6 categories
MA leads 1 • JPM leads 1 • AMTB leads 0 • V leads 0 • FIS leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — V and MA and FIS each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 538.5x AMTB's $521M. V is the more profitable business, keeping 51.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AMTB's 11.2%. On growth, FIS holds the edge at +30.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $521M | $43.0B | $33.9B | $11.7B | $21.1B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $54M | $27.6B | $21.6B | $4.1B | $7.5B | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $58M | $22.2B | $15.6B | $2.7B | $3.2B | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $111M | $21.2B | $17.7B | $2.8B | $4.0B | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +55.6% | +81.3% | +83.0% | +37.6% | +60.8% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.7% | +61.1% | +59.4% | +17.9% | +24.4% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.2% | +51.7% | +45.9% | +22.9% | +15.2% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +21.4% | +49.2% | +52.2% | +23.9% | +19.0% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +30.1% | -2.0% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +57.1% | +35.3% | +21.2% | +30.6% | -29.1% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
FISV leads this category, winning 7 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.5x trailing earnings, FISV trades at a 85% valuation discount to FIS's 50.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FISV offers better value at 0.21x vs FIS's 2.09x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $991M | $627.8B | $433.6B | $19.7B | $25.6B | $908.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.6B | $632.8B | $442.0B | $23.2B | $53.9B | $1.51T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 18.73x | 32.08x | 29.65x | 50.95x | 7.55x | 16.22x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.13x | 24.88x | 24.89x | 6.09x | 5.89x | 14.60x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.03x | 1.41x | 2.09x | 0.21x | 0.92x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 22.07x | 25.10x | 21.52x | 6.36x | 6.09x | 18.52x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.51x | 15.69x | 13.22x | 1.85x | 1.21x | 3.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.03x | 16.97x | 56.78x | 1.43x | 1.02x | 2.51x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 10.12x | 29.10x | 25.64x | 7.03x | 5.90x | 9.01x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MA leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MA delivers a 2.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $2 in annual profit, vs $6 for AMTB. FIS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.29x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MA scores 9/9 vs JPM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.3% | +58.9% | +2.1% | +18.4% | +12.4% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.7% | +22.7% | +29.5% | +7.5% | +4.0% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.6% | +29.2% | +56.5% | +6.0% | +8.1% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.2% | +36.2% | +64.4% | +6.6% | +10.2% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 6 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.11x | 0.66x | 2.45x | 0.29x | 1.13x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $571M | $5.0B | $8.4B | $3.4B | $28.3B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $470M | $20.2B | $10.6B | $599M | $798M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.0B | $25.2B | $19.0B | $4.0B | $29.1B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.29x | 26.72x | 27.23x | 21.16x | 6.39x | 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 $23,548 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,259 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, AMTB leads with a +44.5% total return vs FISV's -70.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.7% vs FISV's -26.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +20.6% | -5.2% | -12.7% | -40.4% | -27.0% | +0.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +44.5% | -3.1% | -8.5% | -50.4% | -70.3% | +20.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +28.9% | +47.5% | +33.0% | -21.0% | -60.0% | +138.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +22.7% | +46.4% | +36.7% | -67.4% | -55.5% | +135.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +40.4% | +342.3% | +438.8% | -26.7% | -9.1% | +481.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +8.8% | +13.8% | +10.0% | -7.6% | -26.3% | +33.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — AMTB and MA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MA is the less volatile stock with a 0.44 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. AMTB currently trades 96.8% from its 52-week high vs FISV's 27.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.93x | 0.48x | 0.44x | 0.58x | 0.71x | 0.87x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.38 | $359.66 | $601.77 | $82.74 | $177.36 | $338.09 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.62 | $293.89 | $464.52 | $37.85 | $47.37 | $269.72 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.8% | +91.0% | +81.4% | +46.2% | +27.0% | +96.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.4 | 57.0 | 49.8 | 35.2 | 35.5 | 72.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 226K | 6.7M | 3.2M | 5.7M | 6.6M | 7.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — V and FIS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AMTB as "Hold", V as "Buy", MA as "Buy", FIS as "Buy", FISV as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 64.6% upside for FIS (target: $63) vs 1.7% for AMTB (target: $24). For income investors, FIS offers the higher dividend yield at 4.27% vs MA's 0.63%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $24.00 | $368.91 | $660.43 | $62.88 | $71.15 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 61 | 64 | 37 | 60 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.2% | +0.7% | +0.6% | +4.3% | — | +1.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 18 | 14 | 1 | — | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.28 | $2.36 | $3.07 | $1.63 | — | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.0% | +2.1% | +2.7% | +7.2% | +23.0% | +3.8% |
FISV leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). MA leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
AMTB vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AMTB or V or MA or FIS or FISV or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the stronger pick with 16.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) offers the better valuation at 7. 5x trailing P/E (5. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Visa Inc. (V) 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 — AMTB or V or MA or FIS or FISV or JPM?
On trailing P/E, Fiserv, Inc.
(FISV) is the cheapest at 7. 5x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 50. 9x. On forward P/E, Fiserv, Inc. is actually cheaper at 5. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Fiserv, Inc. wins at 0. 17x versus Visa Inc. 's 1. 57x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AMTB or V or MA or FIS or FISV or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +135. 5%, compared to -67. 4% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +481. 2% versus FIS's -26. 7%. 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 V or MA or FIS or FISV or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
44β versus Amerant Bancorp Inc. 's 0. 93β — meaning AMTB is approximately 112% more volatile than MA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 29% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AMTB or V or MA or FIS or FISV or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is pulling ahead at 16.
4% versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amerant Bancorp Inc. grew EPS 386. 4% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FISV leads at 6. 1% annualised revenue growth. 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 V or MA or FIS or FISV or JPM?
Visa Inc.
(V) is the more profitable company, earning 50. 1% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 50. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: V leads at 60. 0% versus 10. 1% for AMTB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MA leads at 83. 4%, 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 V or MA or FIS or FISV 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, Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 17x versus Visa Inc. 's 1. 57x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) trades at 5. 9x forward P/E versus 24. 9x for Mastercard Incorporated — 19. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 64. 6% to $62. 88.
08Which pays a better dividend — AMTB or V or MA or FIS or FISV or JPM?
In this comparison, FIS (4.
3% yield), JPM (1. 8% yield), AMTB (1. 2% yield), V (0. 7% yield), MA (0. 6% yield) pay a dividend. FISV does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is AMTB or V or MA or FIS or FISV or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
44), 0. 6% yield, +438. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MA: +438. 8%, FISV: -9. 1%), 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 V and MA and FIS and FISV and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (AMTB (Financial Services) and V (Financial Services) and MA (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology) and FISV (Technology) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: AMTB is a small-cap quality compounder stock; V is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MA is a large-cap high-growth stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; FISV is a mid-cap deep-value stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. AMTB, V, MA, FIS, JPM pay a dividend while FISV 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.