BNS vs CM

For growth investors, The Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS) is the stronger pick with 148.

2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM). Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM) offers the better valuation at 17. 8x trailing P/E (11. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS) a "Buy" — based on 19 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, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM) is the cheapest at 17.

8x versus The Bank of Nova Scotia at 18. 7x. On forward P/E, The Bank of Nova Scotia is actually cheaper at 9. 6x — 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: Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce wins at 0. 70x versus The Bank of Nova Scotia's 6. 73x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM) delivered a total return of +137.

3%, compared to +45. 4% for The Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CM returned +262. 4% versus BNS's +123. 3%. 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), The Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

60β versus Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce's 0. 70β — meaning CM is approximately 16% more volatile than BNS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 6% for The Bank of Nova Scotia — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS) is pulling ahead at 148.

2% versus -3. 1% for Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce grew EPS 17. 7% year-over-year, compared to -2. 9% for The Bank of Nova Scotia. 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.

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM) is the more profitable company, earning 13.

6% net margin versus 10. 6% for The Bank of Nova Scotia — meaning it keeps 13. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CM leads at 17. 6% versus 14. 4% for BNS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BNS leads at 44. 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.

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, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 70x versus The Bank of Nova Scotia's 6. 73x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, The Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS) trades at 9. 6x forward P/E versus 11. 0x for Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce — 1. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CM: -5. 0% to $106. 62.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

The Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS) offers the highest yield at 4. 0%, versus 2. 8% for Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

70), 2. 8% yield, +262. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CM: +262. 4%, BNS: +123. 3%), 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: BNS is a mid-cap high-growth stock; CM is a mid-cap deep-value 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.