BCH vs BMA

For growth investors, Banco Macro S.

A. (BMA) is the stronger pick with -33. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -43. 1% for Banco de Chile (BCH). Banco de Chile (BCH) offers the better valuation at 13. 8x trailing P/E (0. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Banco de Chile (BCH) a "Buy" — based on 8 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, Banco de Chile (BCH) is the cheapest at 13.

8x versus Banco Macro S. A. at 20. 4x. On forward P/E, Banco Macro S. A. is actually cheaper at 0. 0x — 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: Banco Macro S. A. wins at 0. 00x versus Banco de Chile's 0. 00x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Banco Macro S.

A. (BMA) delivered a total return of +520. 7%, compared to +97. 3% for Banco de Chile (BCH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BCH returned +154. 4% versus BMA's +48. 5%. 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), Banco de Chile (BCH) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

95β versus Banco Macro S. A. 's 1. 76β — meaning BMA is approximately 85% more volatile than BCH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 2% for Banco de Chile — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Banco Macro S.

A. (BMA) is pulling ahead at -33. 3% versus -43. 1% for Banco de Chile (BCH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Banco de Chile grew EPS -1. 3% year-over-year, compared to -44. 6% for Banco Macro S. A.. 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.

Banco de Chile (BCH) is the more profitable company, earning 45.

1% net margin versus 5. 0% for Banco Macro S. A. — meaning it keeps 45. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BCH leads at 100. 0% versus 5. 6% for BMA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BCH leads at 100. 0%, 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, Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 00x versus Banco de Chile's 0. 00x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) trades at 0. 0x forward P/E versus 0. 0x for Banco de Chile — 0. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BMA: 73. 6% to $130. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) offers the highest yield at 7. 0%, versus 5. 7% for Banco de Chile (BCH).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Banco de Chile (BCH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

95), 5. 7% yield, +154. 4% 10Y return). Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) carries a higher beta of 1. 76 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (BCH: +154. 4%, BMA: +48. 5%), 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: BCH is a mid-cap deep-value stock; BMA is a small-cap income-oriented 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.