Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CFR vs FHN vs BOKF vs WTFC vs UMBF
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
CFR vs FHN vs BOKF vs WTFC vs UMBF — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $8.72B | $11.87B | $10.28B | $10.13B | $9.99B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.92B | $4.99B | $3.36B | $4.23B | $4.44B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $669M | $982M | $537M | $824M | $883M |
| Gross Margin | 75.0% | 67.3% | 57.1% | 62.2% | 54.4% |
| Operating Margin | 26.4% | 25.7% | 19.8% | 26.4% | 20.3% |
| Forward P/E | 13.3x | 11.4x | 13.0x | 11.6x | 10.3x |
| Total Debt | $4.77B | $4.57B | $4.45B | $4.48B | $3.80B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8.86B | $961M | $1.43B | $468M | $953M |
CFR vs FHN vs BOKF vs WTFC vs UMBF — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cullen/Frost Banker… (CFR) | 100 | 182.4 | +82.4% |
| First Horizon Corpo… (FHN) | 100 | 261.7 | +161.7% |
| BOK Financial Corpo… (BOKF) | 100 | 262.0 | +162.0% |
| Wintrust Financial … (WTFC) | 100 | 356.9 | +256.9% |
| UMB Financial Corpo… (UMBF) | 100 | 255.8 | +155.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CFR vs FHN vs BOKF vs WTFC vs UMBF
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CFR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 33 yrs, beta 0.82, yield 2.9%
- Beta 0.82, yield 2.9%, current ratio 0.21x
- Beta 0.82 vs UMBF's 1.19
- 2.9% yield, 33-year raise streak, vs UMBF's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
FHN is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.10, Low D/E 50.0%, current ratio 0.96x
BOKF ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +44.8% vs CFR's +16.3%
WTFC is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 224.8% 10Y total return vs BOKF's 168.5%
- PEG 0.59 vs BOKF's 4.38
UMBF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and bank quality.
- Rev growth 68.5%, EPS growth 1.6%
- NIM 3.5% vs BOKF's 2.4%
- 68.5% NII/revenue growth vs FHN's 1.0%
- Lower P/E (10.3x vs 11.4x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 68.5% NII/revenue growth vs FHN's 1.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.3x vs 11.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs CFR's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.82 vs UMBF's 1.19 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 33-year raise streak, vs UMBF's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +44.8% vs CFR's +16.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs CFR's 0.5% |
CFR vs FHN vs BOKF vs WTFC vs UMBF — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CFR vs FHN vs BOKF vs WTFC vs UMBF — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CFR leads in 2 of 6 categories
UMBF leads 2 • WTFC leads 1 • FHN leads 0 • BOKF leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CFR leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FHN is the larger business by revenue, generating $5.0B annually — 1.7x CFR's $2.9B. CFR is the more profitable business, keeping 22.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BOKF's 15.6%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.9B | $5.0B | $3.4B | $4.2B | $4.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $861M | $1.3B | $797M | $1.2B | $1.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $669M | $982M | $537M | $824M | $883M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $806M | $628M | $1.5B | $915M | $985M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +75.0% | +67.3% | +57.1% | +62.2% | +54.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +26.4% | +25.7% | +19.8% | +26.4% | +20.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +22.2% | +19.7% | +15.6% | +19.5% | +15.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.4% | +12.6% | +42.6% | +21.5% | +22.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +17.0% | +79.3% | +1.8% | +25.5% | +176.9% |
Valuation Metrics
UMBF leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.0x trailing earnings, FHN trades at a 21% valuation discount to BOKF's 16.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), WTFC offers better value at 0.66x vs BOKF's 5.51x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.7B | $11.9B | $10.3B | $10.1B | $10.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.6B | $15.5B | $13.3B | $14.1B | $12.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.97x | 13.02x | 16.39x | 13.08x | 14.37x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.31x | 11.41x | 13.05x | 11.62x | 10.31x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.98x | — | 5.51x | 0.66x | 1.59x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 5.38x | 11.58x | 17.23x | 11.71x | 12.11x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.99x | 2.38x | 3.06x | 2.39x | 2.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.94x | 1.33x | 1.53x | 1.41x | 1.30x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 68.52x | 18.90x | 7.19x | 11.12x | 10.21x |
Profitability & Efficiency
UMBF leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CFR delivers a 15.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $15 in annual profit, vs $9 for BOKF. UMBF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.49x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CFR's 1.04x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FHN scores 7/9 vs WTFC's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +15.1% | +10.7% | +8.9% | +11.3% | +11.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.3% | +1.2% | +1.1% | +1.2% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.5% | +7.0% | +4.1% | +7.5% | +7.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +14.0% | +10.2% | +5.5% | +6.4% | +14.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.04x | 0.50x | 0.80x | 0.62x | 0.49x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$4.1B | $3.6B | $3.0B | $4.0B | $2.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8.9B | $961M | $1.4B | $468M | $953M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.8B | $4.6B | $4.5B | $4.5B | $3.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.21x | 0.82x | 0.55x | 0.74x | 0.63x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WTFC leads this category, winning 4 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 $12,659 for CFR. Over the past 12 months, BOKF leads with a +44.8% total return vs CFR's +16.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WTFC at 35.3% vs CFR's 15.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +8.9% | +2.1% | +13.0% | +6.4% | +13.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +16.3% | +34.9% | +44.8% | +34.0% | +31.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +53.8% | +145.7% | +79.4% | +147.6% | +143.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +26.6% | +43.6% | +59.4% | +102.9% | +41.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +181.5% | +119.6% | +168.5% | +224.8% | +165.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +15.4% | +34.9% | +21.5% | +35.3% | +34.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CFR and UMBF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CFR is the less volatile stock with a 0.82 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than UMBF's 1.19 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. UMBF currently trades 96.4% from its 52-week high vs FHN's 92.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.82x | 1.10x | 1.03x | 1.16x | 1.19x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $148.97 | $26.56 | $139.73 | $162.96 | $136.11 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $119.00 | $18.58 | $91.35 | $113.75 | $98.16 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +93.0% | +92.1% | +95.5% | +92.8% | +96.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.1 | 62.0 | 58.9 | 63.5 | 78.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 524K | 5.0M | 317K | 438K | 613K |
Analyst Outlook
CFR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CFR as "Hold", FHN as "Hold", BOKF as "Hold", WTFC as "Buy", UMBF as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 15.5% upside for WTFC (target: $175) vs -1.4% for BOKF (target: $132). For income investors, CFR offers the higher dividend yield at 2.88% vs UMBF's 1.35%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $154.88 | $28.00 | $131.57 | $174.57 | $150.40 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 33 | 35 | 21 | 22 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.9% | +2.6% | +1.7% | — | +1.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 33 | 3 | 11 | 13 | 17 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $3.98 | $0.63 | $2.24 | — | $1.77 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.8% | +7.7% | +0.9% | 0.0% | +1.3% |
CFR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). UMBF leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
CFR vs FHN vs BOKF vs WTFC vs UMBF: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CFR or FHN or BOKF or WTFC or UMBF 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 1. 0% for First Horizon Corporation (FHN). First Horizon Corporation (FHN) offers the better valuation at 13. 0x trailing P/E (11. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) a "Buy" — based on 22 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 — CFR or FHN or BOKF or WTFC or UMBF?
On trailing P/E, First Horizon Corporation (FHN) is the cheapest at 13.
0x versus BOK Financial Corporation at 16. 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 BOK Financial Corporation's 4. 38x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CFR or FHN or BOKF or WTFC or UMBF?
Over the past 5 years, Wintrust Financial Corporation (WTFC) delivered a total return of +102.
9%, compared to +26. 6% for Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. (CFR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WTFC returned +224. 8% versus FHN's +119. 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 — CFR or FHN or BOKF or WTFC or UMBF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc.
(CFR) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 82β versus UMB Financial Corporation's 1. 19β — meaning UMBF is approximately 45% more volatile than CFR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 49% versus 104% for Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CFR or FHN or BOKF or WTFC or UMBF?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) is pulling ahead at 68.
5% versus 1. 0% for First Horizon Corporation (FHN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: First Horizon Corporation grew EPS 38. 2% year-over-year, compared to 1. 5% for BOK 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 — CFR or FHN or BOKF or WTFC or UMBF?
Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc.
(CFR) is the more profitable company, earning 22. 2% net margin versus 15. 6% for BOK Financial Corporation — meaning it keeps 22. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WTFC leads at 26. 4% versus 19. 8% for BOKF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CFR leads at 75. 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.
07Is CFR or FHN or BOKF or WTFC or UMBF 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 BOK Financial Corporation's 4. 38x. 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 13. 3x for Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. — 3. 0x 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 — CFR or FHN or BOKF or WTFC or UMBF?
In this comparison, CFR (2.
9% yield), FHN (2. 6% yield), BOKF (1. 7% yield), UMBF (1. 4% yield) pay a dividend. WTFC does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CFR or FHN or BOKF or WTFC or UMBF better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc.
(CFR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 82), 2. 9% yield, +181. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CFR: +181. 5%, 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 CFR and FHN and BOKF and WTFC and UMBF?
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: CFR is a small-cap deep-value stock; FHN is a mid-cap deep-value stock; BOKF is a mid-cap deep-value stock; WTFC is a mid-cap deep-value stock; UMBF is a small-cap high-growth stock. CFR, FHN, BOKF, UMBF 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.