Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
BMA vs SUPV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
BMA vs SUPV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $4.84B | $765M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.46T | $2.33T |
| Net Income (TTM) | $291.41B | $-48.45B |
| Gross Margin | 68.3% | 39.5% |
| Operating Margin | 5.6% | -4.8% |
| Forward P/E | 0.0x | 0.0x |
| Total Debt | $465.41B | $1.05T |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2.78T | $1.60T |
BMA vs SUPV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Banco Macro S.A. (BMA) | 100 | 448.5 | +348.5% |
| Grupo Supervielle S… (SUPV) | 100 | 443.7 | +343.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BMA vs SUPV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BMA is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 1.76, yield 6.8%
- 56.3% 10Y total return vs SUPV's -17.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.76, Low D/E 11.5%, current ratio 0.51x
SUPV carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and bank quality.
- Rev growth 13.7%, EPS growth -145.9%
- NIM 12.1% vs BMA's 11.1%
- 13.7% NII/revenue growth vs BMA's -33.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 13.7% NII/revenue growth vs BMA's -33.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.0x vs 0.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs BMA's 0.6% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.76 vs SUPV's 2.51, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 6.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs SUPV's 3.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | -6.5% vs SUPV's -38.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs BMA's 0.6% |
BMA vs SUPV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BMA leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BMA is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.46T annually — 2.8x SUPV's $2.33T. BMA is the more profitable business, keeping 5.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SUPV's -2.4%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6.46T | $2.33T |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $620.9B | -$73.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $291.4B | -$48.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2.44T | -$725.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +68.3% | +39.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +5.6% | -4.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.0% | -2.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.3% | -48.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -136.4% | -157.4% |
Valuation Metrics
SUPV leads this category, winning 4 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.8B | $765M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.2B | $371M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 21.07x | -18.65x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 0.01x | 0.01x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.41x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.89x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.04x | 0.46x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.69x | 1.06x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.49x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
BMA leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BMA delivers a 6.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-5 for SUPV. BMA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SUPV's 1.04x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BMA scores 6/9 vs SUPV's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.1% | -5.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.4% | -0.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.5% | -5.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.5% | -2.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.11x | 1.04x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2.31T | -$549.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.78T | $1.60T |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $465.4B | $1.05T |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.28x | -0.11x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BMA leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BMA five years ago would be worth $69,454 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $52,009 for SUPV. Over the past 12 months, BMA leads with a -6.5% total return vs SUPV's -38.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BMA at 70.7% vs SUPV's 58.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -11.6% | -24.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -6.5% | -38.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +397.7% | +299.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +594.5% | +420.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +56.3% | -17.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +70.7% | +58.7% |
Risk & Volatility
BMA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BMA is the less volatile stock with a 1.76 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SUPV's 2.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BMA currently trades 72.5% from its 52-week high vs SUPV's 51.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.76x | 2.51x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $106.15 | $16.90 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $38.30 | $4.54 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.5% | +51.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 35.3 | 36.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 364K | 841K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — BMA and SUPV each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates BMA as "Buy" and SUPV as "Sell". Consensus price targets imply 68.9% upside for BMA (target: $130) vs -19.9% for SUPV (target: $7). For income investors, BMA offers the higher dividend yield at 6.81% vs SUPV's 3.59%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Sell |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $130.00 | $7.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 8 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +6.8% | +3.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $7302.65 | $437.61 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
BMA leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). SUPV leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
BMA vs SUPV: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BMA or SUPV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Grupo Supervielle S.
A. (SUPV) is the stronger pick with 13. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -33. 3% for Banco Macro S. A. (BMA). Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) offers the better valuation at 21. 1x trailing P/E (0. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — BMA or SUPV?
On forward P/E, Grupo Supervielle S.
A. is actually cheaper at 0. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BMA or SUPV?
Over the past 5 years, Banco Macro S.
A. (BMA) delivered a total return of +594. 5%, compared to +420. 1% for Grupo Supervielle S. A. (SUPV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BMA returned +56. 3% versus SUPV's -17. 6%. 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 — BMA or SUPV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Banco Macro S.
A. (BMA) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 76β versus Grupo Supervielle S. A. 's 2. 51β — meaning SUPV is approximately 43% more volatile than BMA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 104% for Grupo Supervielle S. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BMA or SUPV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Grupo Supervielle S.
A. (SUPV) is pulling ahead at 13. 7% versus -33. 3% for Banco Macro S. A. (BMA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Banco Macro S. A. grew EPS -44. 6% year-over-year, compared to -145. 9% for Grupo Supervielle 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.
06Which has better profit margins — BMA or SUPV?
Banco Macro S.
A. (BMA) is the more profitable company, earning 5. 0% net margin versus -2. 4% for Grupo Supervielle S. A. — meaning it keeps 5. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BMA leads at 5. 6% versus -4. 8% for SUPV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BMA leads at 68. 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 BMA or SUPV more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Grupo Supervielle S.
A. (SUPV) trades at 0. 0x forward P/E versus 0. 0x for Banco Macro S. A. — 0. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BMA: 68. 9% to $130. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BMA or SUPV?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) offers the highest yield at 6. 8%, versus 3. 6% for Grupo Supervielle S. A. (SUPV).
09Is BMA or SUPV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Banco Macro S.
A. (BMA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (6. 8% yield). Grupo Supervielle S. A. (SUPV) carries a higher beta of 2. 51 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (BMA: +56. 3%, SUPV: -17. 6%), 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 BMA and SUPV?
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.
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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.