Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ASB vs UMBF vs WTFC vs FHN vs HBAN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
ASB vs UMBF vs WTFC vs FHN vs HBAN — 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 | $4.74B | $10.00B | $10.16B | $11.94B | $25.52B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.46B | $4.44B | $4.23B | $4.99B | $12.48B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $475M | $883M | $824M | $982M | $2.21B |
| Gross Margin | 58.3% | 54.4% | 62.2% | 67.3% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 23.5% | 20.3% | 26.4% | 25.7% | 21.5% |
| Forward P/E | 9.7x | 10.2x | 11.6x | 11.5x | 11.1x |
| Total Debt | $4.17B | $3.80B | $4.48B | $4.57B | $18.48B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $575M | $953M | $468M | $961M | $1.78B |
ASB vs UMBF vs WTFC vs FHN vs HBAN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Associated Banc-Corp (ASB) | 100 | 203.8 | +103.8% |
| UMB Financial Corpo… (UMBF) | 100 | 256.2 | +156.2% |
| Wintrust Financial … (WTFC) | 100 | 358.0 | +258.0% |
| First Horizon Corpo… (FHN) | 100 | 263.2 | +163.2% |
| Huntington Bancshar… (HBAN) | 100 | 181.3 | +81.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ASB vs UMBF vs WTFC vs FHN vs HBAN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ASB is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 16.8%, EPS growth 284.7%
- Lower P/E (9.7x vs 11.1x)
UMBF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for bank quality.
- NIM 3.5% vs ASB's 2.7%
- 68.5% NII/revenue growth vs FHN's 1.0%
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs FHN's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
- 1.4% yield, 17-year raise streak, vs HBAN's 3.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
WTFC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 225.7% 10Y total return vs UMBF's 165.5%
- PEG 0.59 vs ASB's 1.17
- +31.3% vs HBAN's +10.0%
FHN is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.07, Low D/E 50.0%, current ratio 0.96x
- Beta 1.07, yield 2.6%, current ratio 0.96x
- Beta 1.07 vs ASB's 1.23, lower leverage
HBAN is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 1.08, yield 3.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 68.5% NII/revenue growth vs FHN's 1.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.7x vs 11.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs FHN's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.07 vs ASB's 1.23, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.4% yield, 17-year raise streak, vs HBAN's 3.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +31.3% vs HBAN's +10.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs FHN's 0.4% |
ASB vs UMBF vs WTFC vs FHN vs HBAN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ASB vs UMBF vs WTFC vs FHN vs HBAN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ASB leads in 1 of 6 categories
UMBF leads 1 • WTFC leads 1 • FHN leads 0 • HBAN leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ASB and FHN each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HBAN is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.5B annually — 5.1x ASB's $2.5B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 19.7% (FHN) to 15.8% (UMBF).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.5B | $4.4B | $4.2B | $5.0B | $12.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $653M | $1.1B | $1.2B | $1.3B | $3.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $475M | $883M | $824M | $982M | $2.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $579M | $985M | $915M | $628M | $2.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +58.3% | +54.4% | +62.2% | +67.3% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +23.5% | +20.3% | +26.4% | +25.7% | +21.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +19.3% | +15.8% | +19.5% | +19.7% | +17.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +23.8% | +22.0% | +21.5% | +12.6% | +18.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +176.9% | +176.9% | +25.5% | +79.3% | -11.8% |
Valuation Metrics
ASB leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.3x trailing earnings, ASB trades at a 28% valuation discount to UMBF's 14.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), WTFC offers better value at 0.66x vs UMBF's 1.60x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.7B | $10.0B | $10.2B | $11.9B | $25.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $8.3B | $12.8B | $14.2B | $15.5B | $42.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 10.31x | 14.39x | 13.12x | 13.09x | 11.60x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.68x | 10.17x | 11.64x | 11.48x | 11.07x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.24x | 1.60x | 0.66x | — | 0.77x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 14.42x | 12.12x | 11.74x | 11.63x | 15.70x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.93x | 2.25x | 2.40x | 2.39x | 2.04x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.96x | 1.31x | 1.41x | 1.34x | 1.00x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.10x | 10.23x | 11.16x | 19.01x | 11.20x |
Profitability & Efficiency
UMBF leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
UMBF delivers a 11.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $10 for ASB. UMBF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.49x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ASB's 0.84x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ASB scores 7/9 vs HBAN's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.8% | +11.7% | +11.3% | +10.7% | +10.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.1% | +1.2% | +1.2% | +1.2% | +1.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.1% | +7.5% | +7.5% | +7.0% | +5.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.7% | +14.4% | +6.4% | +10.2% | +4.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.84x | 0.49x | 0.62x | 0.50x | 0.76x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3.6B | $2.8B | $4.0B | $3.6B | $16.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $575M | $953M | $468M | $961M | $1.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.2B | $3.8B | $4.5B | $4.6B | $18.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.60x | 0.63x | 0.74x | 0.82x | 0.62x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WTFC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in WTFC five years ago would be worth $20,371 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,189 for HBAN. Over the past 12 months, WTFC leads with a +31.3% total return vs HBAN's +10.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WTFC at 35.4% vs HBAN's 22.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +11.8% | +13.1% | +6.7% | +2.7% | -6.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +26.8% | +28.4% | +31.3% | +31.0% | +10.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +105.7% | +144.0% | +148.4% | +147.0% | +84.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +43.5% | +42.4% | +103.7% | +45.4% | +21.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +104.0% | +165.5% | +225.7% | +120.7% | +120.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +27.2% | +34.6% | +35.4% | +35.2% | +22.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ASB and FHN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FHN is the less volatile stock with a 1.07 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ASB's 1.23 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ASB currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs HBAN's 82.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.23x | 1.19x | 1.15x | 1.07x | 1.08x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $29.52 | $136.11 | $162.96 | $26.56 | $19.46 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $22.40 | $98.16 | $114.73 | $18.88 | $14.89 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.7% | +96.5% | +93.1% | +92.7% | +82.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.9 | 68.3 | 58.3 | 52.7 | 46.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.2M | 616K | 437K | 5.0M | 24.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — UMBF and HBAN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ASB as "Hold", UMBF as "Buy", WTFC as "Buy", FHN as "Hold", HBAN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 26.4% upside for HBAN (target: $20) vs 4.2% for ASB (target: $30). For income investors, HBAN offers the higher dividend yield at 3.74% vs UMBF's 1.35%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $29.75 | $150.67 | $174.57 | $28.00 | $20.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 20 | 18 | 22 | 35 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.3% | +1.4% | — | +2.6% | +3.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 14 | 17 | 13 | 3 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.93 | $1.77 | — | $0.63 | $0.60 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.6% | +1.3% | 0.0% | +7.7% | 0.0% |
ASB leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). UMBF leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
ASB vs UMBF vs WTFC vs FHN vs HBAN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ASB or UMBF or WTFC or FHN or HBAN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) is the stronger pick with 68.
5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 0% for First Horizon Corporation (FHN). Associated Banc-Corp (ASB) offers the better valuation at 10. 3x trailing P/E (9. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) a "Buy" — based on 18 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 — ASB or UMBF or WTFC or FHN or HBAN?
On trailing P/E, Associated Banc-Corp (ASB) is the cheapest at 10.
3x versus UMB Financial Corporation at 14. 4x. On forward P/E, Associated Banc-Corp is actually cheaper at 9. 7x. 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 Associated Banc-Corp's 1. 17x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ASB or UMBF or WTFC or FHN or HBAN?
Over the past 5 years, Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) delivered a total return of +103.
7%, compared to +21. 9% for Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (HBAN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WTFC returned +225. 7% versus ASB's +104. 0%. 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 — ASB or UMBF or WTFC or FHN or HBAN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), First Horizon Corporation (FHN) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
07β versus Associated Banc-Corp's 1. 23β — meaning ASB is approximately 15% more volatile than FHN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 49% versus 84% for Associated Banc-Corp — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ASB or UMBF or WTFC or FHN or HBAN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) is pulling ahead at 68.
5% versus 1. 0% for First Horizon Corporation (FHN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Associated Banc-Corp grew EPS 284. 7% year-over-year, compared to 1. 6% for UMB 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 — ASB or UMBF or WTFC or FHN or HBAN?
First Horizon Corporation (FHN) is the more profitable company, earning 19.
7% net margin versus 15. 8% for UMB Financial Corporation — meaning it keeps 19. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WTFC leads at 26. 4% versus 20. 3% for UMBF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FHN leads at 67. 3%, 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 ASB or UMBF or WTFC or FHN or HBAN 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, Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 59x versus Associated Banc-Corp's 1. 17x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Associated Banc-Corp (ASB) trades at 9. 7x forward P/E versus 11. 6x for Wintrust Financial Corporation — 2. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HBAN: 26. 4% to $20. 38.
08Which pays a better dividend — ASB or UMBF or WTFC or FHN or HBAN?
In this comparison, HBAN (3.
7% yield), ASB (3. 3% yield), FHN (2. 6% yield), UMBF (1. 4% yield) pay a dividend. WTFC does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ASB or UMBF or WTFC or FHN or HBAN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, First Horizon Corporation (FHN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.
07), 2. 6% yield, +120. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FHN: +120. 7%, WTFC: +225. 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.
10What are the main differences between ASB and UMBF and WTFC and FHN and HBAN?
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: ASB is a small-cap high-growth stock; UMBF is a mid-cap high-growth stock; WTFC is a mid-cap deep-value stock; FHN is a mid-cap deep-value stock; HBAN is a mid-cap deep-value stock. ASB, UMBF, FHN, HBAN 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.