Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CBFV vs NTRS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
CBFV vs NTRS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $190M | $32.31B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $69M | $14.30B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $5M | $1.74B |
| Gross Margin | 62.5% | 56.5% |
| Operating Margin | 7.7% | 16.3% |
| Forward P/E | 12.6x | 16.1x |
| Total Debt | $35M | $16.43B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $32M | $61.13B |
CBFV vs NTRS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CB Financial Servic… (CBFV) | 100 | 171.9 | +71.9% |
| Northern Trust Corp… (NTRS) | 100 | 219.7 | +119.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CBFV vs NTRS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CBFV is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.41, yield 2.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.41, Low D/E 22.1%, current ratio 0.02x
- Beta 0.41, yield 2.6%, current ratio 0.02x
NTRS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth -9.9%, EPS growth -10.5%
- 183.6% 10Y total return vs CBFV's 114.0%
- -9.9% NII/revenue growth vs CBFV's -13.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | -9.9% NII/revenue growth vs CBFV's -13.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.6x vs 16.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs CBFV's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.41 vs NTRS's 1.07, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs NTRS's 1.8% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +62.8% vs CBFV's +34.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs CBFV's 0.5% |
CBFV vs NTRS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CBFV vs NTRS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTRS leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTRS is the larger business by revenue, generating $14.3B annually — 208.3x CBFV's $69M. NTRS is the more profitable business, keeping 12.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CBFV's 7.1%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $69M | $14.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $7M | $3.2B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $5M | $1.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $17M | $4.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +62.5% | +56.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +7.7% | +16.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +7.1% | +12.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +24.8% | +33.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +93.5% | +7.1% |
Valuation Metrics
NTRS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 19.9x trailing earnings, NTRS trades at a 51% valuation discount to CBFV's 40.8x P/E.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $190M | $32.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $193M | -$12.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 40.78x | 19.95x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.62x | 16.08x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.02x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 27.19x | -3.85x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.77x | 2.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.26x | 2.54x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.09x | 5.92x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NTRS leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NTRS delivers a 13.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $3 for CBFV. CBFV carries lower financial leverage with a 0.22x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NTRS's 1.27x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NTRS scores 6/9 vs CBFV's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +3.2% | +13.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.3% | +1.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.1% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.9% | +9.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.22x | 1.27x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3M | -$44.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $32M | $61.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $35M | $16.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.21x | 0.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NTRS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CBFV five years ago would be worth $19,369 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $16,257 for NTRS. Over the past 12 months, NTRS leads with a +62.8% total return vs CBFV's +34.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTRS at 35.6% vs CBFV's 26.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +9.8% | +26.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +34.6% | +62.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +103.8% | +149.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.7% | +62.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +114.0% | +183.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +26.8% | +35.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CBFV and NTRS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CBFV is the less volatile stock with a 0.41 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NTRS's 1.07 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.41x | 1.07x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $37.92 | $175.11 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $27.11 | $107.08 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.9% | +99.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 67.1 | 57.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4K | 1.0M |
Analyst Outlook
CBFV leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates CBFV as "Hold" and NTRS as "Hold". For income investors, CBFV offers the higher dividend yield at 2.58% vs NTRS's 1.80%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $153.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 3 | 35 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +1.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.97 | $3.14 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.6% | +3.9% |
NTRS leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). CBFV leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
CBFV vs NTRS: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CBFV or NTRS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS) is the stronger pick with -9.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 3% for CB Financial Services, Inc. (CBFV). Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS) offers the better valuation at 19. 9x trailing P/E (16. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate CB Financial Services, Inc. (CBFV) a "Hold" — based on 3 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 — CBFV or NTRS?
On trailing P/E, Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS) is the cheapest at 19.
9x versus CB Financial Services, Inc. at 40. 8x. On forward P/E, CB Financial Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 12. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CBFV or NTRS?
Over the past 5 years, CB Financial Services, Inc.
(CBFV) delivered a total return of +93. 7%, compared to +62. 6% for Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTRS returned +183. 6% versus CBFV's +114. 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 — CBFV or NTRS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CB Financial Services, Inc.
(CBFV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 41β versus Northern Trust Corporation's 1. 07β — meaning NTRS is approximately 159% more volatile than CBFV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CB Financial Services, Inc. (CBFV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 22% versus 127% for Northern Trust Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CBFV or NTRS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS) is pulling ahead at -9.
9% versus -13. 3% for CB Financial Services, Inc. (CBFV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Northern Trust Corporation grew EPS -10. 5% year-over-year, compared to -61. 3% for CB Financial Services, Inc.. 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 — CBFV or NTRS?
Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS) is the more profitable company, earning 12.
1% net margin versus 7. 1% for CB Financial Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 12. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NTRS leads at 16. 3% versus 7. 7% for CBFV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CBFV leads at 62. 5%, 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 CBFV or NTRS more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, CB Financial Services, Inc.
(CBFV) trades at 12. 6x forward P/E versus 16. 1x for Northern Trust Corporation — 3. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.
08Which pays a better dividend — CBFV or NTRS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
CB Financial Services, Inc. (CBFV) offers the highest yield at 2. 6%, versus 1. 8% for Northern Trust Corporation (NTRS).
09Is CBFV or NTRS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CB Financial Services, Inc.
(CBFV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 41), 2. 6% yield, +114. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CBFV: +114. 0%, NTRS: +183. 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 CBFV and NTRS?
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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.