Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
BKU vs UMBF vs WTFC vs WSFS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
BKU vs UMBF vs WTFC vs WSFS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $3.48B | $9.99B | $10.13B | $3.80B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.14B | $4.44B | $4.23B | $1.36B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $268M | $883M | $824M | $287M |
| Gross Margin | 49.5% | 54.4% | 62.2% | 74.7% |
| Operating Margin | 16.7% | 20.3% | 26.4% | 28.0% |
| Forward P/E | 11.5x | 10.3x | 11.6x | 11.8x |
| Total Debt | $1.97B | $3.80B | $4.48B | $303M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $218M | $953M | $468M | $1.33B |
BKU vs UMBF vs WTFC vs WSFS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BankUnited, Inc. (BKU) | 100 | 255.8 | +155.8% |
| UMB Financial Corpo… (UMBF) | 100 | 255.8 | +155.8% |
| Wintrust Financial … (WTFC) | 100 | 356.9 | +256.9% |
| WSFS Financial Corp… (WSFS) | 100 | 260.4 | +160.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BKU vs UMBF vs WTFC vs WSFS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BKU carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for defensive and bank quality.
- Beta 1.20, yield 2.5%, current ratio 15.41x
- NIM 4.1% vs WTFC's 3.1%
- Lower P/E (11.5x vs 11.8x)
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs WSFS's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
UMBF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- Dividend streak 17 yrs, beta 1.19, yield 1.4%
- Rev growth 68.5%, EPS growth 1.6%
- 68.5% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1%
WTFC is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 224.8% 10Y total return vs UMBF's 165.1%
- PEG 0.59 vs UMBF's 1.14
WSFS is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.89, Low D/E 11.1%, current ratio 0.08x
- Beta 0.89 vs BKU's 1.20, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 68.5% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.5x vs 11.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs WSFS's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.89 vs BKU's 1.20, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs UMBF's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +46.6% vs UMBF's +31.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs WSFS's 0.5% |
BKU vs UMBF vs WTFC vs WSFS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
BKU vs UMBF vs WTFC vs WSFS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
WSFS leads in 3 of 6 categories
BKU leads 2 • UMBF leads 0 • WTFC leads 0 • 1 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)
UMBF is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.4B annually — 3.3x WSFS's $1.4B. WSFS is the more profitable business, keeping 21.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BKU's 12.5%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.1B | $4.4B | $4.2B | $1.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $393M | $1.1B | $1.2B | $408M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $268M | $883M | $824M | $287M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $359M | $985M | $915M | $214M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +49.5% | +54.4% | +62.2% | +74.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +16.7% | +20.3% | +26.4% | +28.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +12.5% | +15.8% | +19.5% | +21.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +16.7% | +22.0% | +21.5% | +15.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -1.1% | +176.9% | +25.5% | +22.9% |
Valuation Metrics
BKU leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.1x trailing earnings, WTFC trades at a 9% valuation discount to UMBF's 14.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), WTFC offers better value at 0.66x vs UMBF's 1.59x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.5B | $10.0B | $10.1B | $3.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.2B | $12.8B | $14.1B | $2.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.36x | 14.37x | 13.08x | 14.16x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.46x | 10.31x | 11.62x | 11.79x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.17x | 1.59x | 0.66x | 0.81x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.32x | 12.11x | 11.71x | 6.80x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.63x | 2.25x | 2.39x | 2.79x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.19x | 1.30x | 1.41x | 1.44x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.71x | 10.21x | 11.12x | 17.79x |
Profitability & Efficiency
WSFS leads this category, winning 6 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 $9 for BKU. WSFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BKU's 0.65x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BKU scores 8/9 vs WSFS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.0% | +11.7% | +11.3% | +10.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.8% | +1.2% | +1.2% | +1.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.7% | +7.5% | +7.5% | +9.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.7% | +14.4% | +6.4% | +10.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.65x | 0.49x | 0.62x | 0.11x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.8B | $2.8B | $4.0B | -$1.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $218M | $953M | $468M | $1.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.0B | $3.8B | $4.5B | $303M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.44x | 0.63x | 0.74x | 1.30x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BKU leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in WTFC five years ago would be worth $20,287 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,842 for BKU. Over the past 12 months, BKU leads with a +46.6% total return vs UMBF's +31.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BKU at 43.2% vs WSFS's 33.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.1% | +13.0% | +6.4% | +31.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +46.6% | +31.1% | +34.0% | +37.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +193.8% | +143.7% | +147.6% | +135.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.4% | +41.5% | +102.9% | +43.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +70.4% | +165.1% | +224.8% | +129.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +43.2% | +34.6% | +35.3% | +33.0% |
Risk & Volatility
WSFS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WSFS is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BKU's 1.20 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WSFS currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs BKU's 90.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.20x | 1.19x | 1.16x | 0.89x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $52.11 | $136.11 | $162.96 | $73.22 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $33.05 | $98.16 | $113.75 | $49.92 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.7% | +96.4% | +92.8% | +98.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.1 | 78.4 | 63.5 | 64.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 843K | 613K | 438K | 385K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — BKU and UMBF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BKU as "Hold", UMBF as "Buy", WTFC as "Buy", WSFS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 15.5% upside for WTFC (target: $175) vs 3.6% for WSFS (target: $75). For income investors, BKU offers the higher dividend yield at 2.53% vs WSFS's 0.95%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $53.75 | $150.40 | $174.57 | $74.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 29 | 18 | 22 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.5% | +1.4% | — | +0.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 8 | 17 | 13 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.19 | $1.77 | — | $0.68 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.3% | +1.3% | 0.0% | +7.6% |
WSFS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). BKU leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 1 tied.
BKU vs UMBF vs WTFC vs WSFS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BKU or UMBF or WTFC or WSFS 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 -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) offers the better valuation at 13. 1x trailing P/E (11. 6x 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 — BKU or UMBF or WTFC or WSFS?
On trailing P/E, Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) is the cheapest at 13.
1x versus UMB Financial Corporation at 14. 4x. On forward P/E, UMB 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: Wintrust Financial Corporation wins at 0. 59x versus UMB Financial Corporation's 1. 14x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BKU or UMBF or WTFC or WSFS?
Over the past 5 years, Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) delivered a total return of +102.
9%, compared to +8. 4% for BankUnited, Inc. (BKU). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WTFC returned +224. 8% versus BKU's +70. 4%. 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 — BKU or UMBF or WTFC or WSFS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
89β versus BankUnited, Inc. 's 1. 20β — meaning BKU is approximately 35% 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 65% for BankUnited, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BKU or UMBF or WTFC or WSFS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) is pulling ahead at 68.
5% versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: WSFS Financial Corporation grew EPS 15. 4% 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 — BKU or UMBF or WTFC or WSFS?
WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the more profitable company, earning 21.
1% net margin versus 12. 5% for BankUnited, 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 16. 7% for BKU. 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 BKU or UMBF or WTFC or WSFS 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 UMB Financial Corporation's 1. 14x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) trades at 10. 3x forward P/E versus 11. 8x for WSFS Financial Corporation — 1. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for WTFC: 15. 5% to $174. 57.
08Which pays a better dividend — BKU or UMBF or WTFC or WSFS?
In this comparison, BKU (2.
5% yield), UMBF (1. 4% yield), WSFS (0. 9% yield) pay a dividend. WTFC does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BKU or UMBF or WTFC or WSFS 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.
89), 0. 9% yield, +129. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WSFS: +129. 0%, WTFC: +224. 8%), 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 BKU and UMBF and WTFC and WSFS?
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: BKU is a small-cap deep-value stock; UMBF is a small-cap high-growth stock; WTFC is a mid-cap deep-value stock; WSFS is a small-cap deep-value stock. BKU, UMBF, WSFS 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.