Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
COFS vs FIS vs JKHY vs MBWM vs IBCP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Information Technology Services
Information Technology Services
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
COFS vs FIS vs JKHY vs MBWM vs IBCP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Information Technology Services | Information Technology Services | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $471M | $24.47B | $10.57B | $898M | $699M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $193M | $10.89B | $2.52B | $372M | $315M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $28M | $382M | $519M | $89M | $69M |
| Gross Margin | 58.2% | 38.1% | 44.1% | 64.0% | 69.6% |
| Operating Margin | 17.7% | 17.5% | 26.0% | 27.5% | 25.8% |
| Forward P/E | 8.8x | 7.5x | 21.8x | 9.5x | 9.6x |
| Total Debt | $316M | $4.01B | $0.00 | $826M | $117M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $88M | $599M | $102M | $473M | $52M |
COFS vs FIS vs JKHY vs MBWM vs IBCP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| ChoiceOne Financial… (COFS) | 100 | 107.3 | +7.3% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 34.0 | -66.0% |
| Jack Henry & Associ… (JKHY) | 100 | 80.7 | -19.3% |
| Mercantile Bank Cor… (MBWM) | 100 | 226.7 | +126.7% |
| Independent Bank Co… (IBCP) | 100 | 245.7 | +145.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: COFS vs FIS vs JKHY vs MBWM vs IBCP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
COFS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth and dividends.
- 38.7% NII/revenue growth vs IBCP's -0.3%
- 3.8% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs JKHY's 1.5%
FIS is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.31 vs JKHY's 2.16
- Lower P/E (7.5x vs 9.5x), PEG 0.31 vs 0.63
JKHY is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- Dividend streak 32 yrs, beta 0.28, yield 1.5%
- Rev growth 7.2%, EPS growth 19.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 6.9%
- Beta 0.28 vs COFS's 0.95
- 17.0% ROA vs COFS's 0.7%, ROIC 21.0% vs 4.1%
MBWM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for quality and momentum.
- 23.9% margin vs FIS's 3.5%
- +23.6% vs FIS's -35.3%
IBCP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 184.6% 10Y total return vs MBWM's 178.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.83, Low D/E 23.2%, current ratio 370.62x
- Beta 0.83, yield 3.0%, current ratio 370.62x
- NIM 3.3% vs MBWM's 2.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 38.7% NII/revenue growth vs IBCP's -0.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.5x vs 9.5x), PEG 0.31 vs 0.63 | |
| Quality / Margins | 23.9% margin vs FIS's 3.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.28 vs COFS's 0.95 | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs JKHY's 1.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +23.6% vs FIS's -35.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 17.0% ROA vs COFS's 0.7%, ROIC 21.0% vs 4.1% |
COFS vs FIS vs JKHY vs MBWM vs IBCP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
COFS vs FIS vs JKHY vs MBWM vs IBCP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JKHY leads in 1 of 6 categories
COFS leads 0 • FIS leads 0 • MBWM leads 0 • IBCP leads 0 • 5 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — JKHY and MBWM each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FIS is the larger business by revenue, generating $10.9B annually — 56.5x COFS's $193M. MBWM is the more profitable business, keeping 23.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FIS's 3.5%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $193M | $10.9B | $2.5B | $372M | $315M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $49M | $3.8B | $810M | $107M | $89M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $28M | $382M | $519M | $89M | $69M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $12M | $2.8B | $728M | $11M | $70M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +58.2% | +38.1% | +44.1% | +64.0% | +69.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +17.7% | +17.5% | +26.0% | +27.5% | +25.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +14.6% | +3.5% | +20.6% | +23.9% | +21.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.4% | +26.1% | +28.9% | +3.0% | +22.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +8.2% | +8.7% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.5% | +92.3% | +12.5% | +14.8% | +2.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — FIS and MBWM and IBCP each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.5x trailing earnings, MBWM trades at a 85% valuation discount to FIS's 63.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MBWM offers better value at 0.63x vs FIS's 2.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $471M | $24.5B | $10.6B | $898M | $699M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $699M | $27.9B | $10.5B | $1.3B | $764M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.67x | 63.00x | 23.40x | 9.53x | 10.38x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 8.79x | 7.54x | 21.79x | 9.54x | 9.56x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.58x | 2.32x | 0.63x | 1.97x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 20.45x | 7.66x | 13.53x | 11.75x | 9.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.44x | 2.29x | 4.45x | 2.42x | 2.22x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.95x | 1.76x | 5.01x | 1.17x | 1.41x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 19.73x | 9.97x | 17.97x | 80.15x | 9.96x |
Profitability & Efficiency
JKHY leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JKHY delivers a 24.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $24 in annual profit, vs $3 for FIS. IBCP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.23x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MBWM's 1.14x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IBCP scores 8/9 vs MBWM's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.4% | +2.7% | +24.0% | +13.5% | +14.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.7% | +1.1% | +17.0% | +1.4% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.1% | +6.0% | +21.0% | +5.5% | +10.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.5% | +6.6% | +22.7% | +8.0% | +2.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.68x | 0.29x | — | 1.14x | 0.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $228M | $3.4B | -$102M | $353M | $65M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $88M | $599M | $102M | $473M | $52M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $316M | $4.0B | $0 | $826M | $117M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.52x | 4.64x | 122.37x | 0.79x | 0.91x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — MBWM and IBCP each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MBWM five years ago would be worth $17,837 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,685 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, MBWM leads with a +23.6% total return vs FIS's -35.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IBCP at 32.1% vs FIS's -2.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +9.7% | -27.3% | -17.8% | +10.1% | +7.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +15.0% | -35.3% | -13.6% | +23.6% | +12.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +61.3% | -6.6% | -1.0% | +127.3% | +130.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +47.0% | -63.2% | +0.3% | +78.4% | +63.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +102.0% | -13.2% | +94.9% | +178.2% | +184.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +17.3% | -2.2% | -0.3% | +31.5% | +32.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — JKHY and MBWM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
JKHY is the less volatile stock with a 0.28 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than COFS's 0.95 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MBWM currently trades 93.3% from its 52-week high vs FIS's 57.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.95x | 0.76x | 0.28x | 0.87x | 0.83x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $35.40 | $82.74 | $193.39 | $55.77 | $37.39 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $26.10 | $43.30 | $141.81 | $42.17 | $29.63 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.0% | +57.1% | +75.5% | +93.3% | +90.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.4 | 43.3 | 28.2 | 53.1 | 50.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 75K | 5.5M | 902K | 112K | 176K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — COFS and JKHY each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: COFS as "Buy", FIS as "Buy", JKHY as "Buy", MBWM as "Buy", IBCP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 42.6% upside for FIS (target: $67) vs 7.9% for COFS (target: $34). For income investors, COFS offers the higher dividend yield at 3.85% vs JKHY's 1.54%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $34.00 | $67.38 | $203.75 | $57.00 | $38.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 3 | 37 | 22 | 7 | 7 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.8% | +3.5% | +1.5% | +2.8% | +3.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 5 | 1 | 32 | 6 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.21 | $1.63 | $2.25 | $1.47 | $1.03 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.6% | 0.0% | +0.3% | 0.0% | +1.8% |
JKHY leads in 1 of 6 categories — strongest in Profitability & Efficiency. 5 categories are tied.
COFS vs FIS vs JKHY vs MBWM vs IBCP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is COFS or FIS or JKHY or MBWM or IBCP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ChoiceOne Financial Services, Inc.
(COFS) is the stronger pick with 38. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 3% for Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP). Mercantile Bank Corporation (MBWM) offers the better valuation at 9. 5x trailing P/E (9. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate ChoiceOne Financial Services, Inc. (COFS) a "Buy" — 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 — COFS or FIS or JKHY or MBWM or IBCP?
On trailing P/E, Mercantile Bank Corporation (MBWM) is the cheapest at 9.
5x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 63. 0x. On forward P/E, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 5x — 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: Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. wins at 0. 31x versus Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. 's 2. 16x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — COFS or FIS or JKHY or MBWM or IBCP?
Over the past 5 years, Mercantile Bank Corporation (MBWM) delivered a total return of +78.
4%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IBCP returned +184. 6% versus FIS's -13. 2%. 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 — COFS or FIS or JKHY or MBWM or IBCP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Jack Henry & Associates, Inc.
(JKHY) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 28β versus ChoiceOne Financial Services, Inc. 's 0. 95β — meaning COFS is approximately 234% more volatile than JKHY relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 114% for Mercantile Bank Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — COFS or FIS or JKHY or MBWM or IBCP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ChoiceOne Financial Services, Inc.
(COFS) is pulling ahead at 38. 7% versus -0. 3% for Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. grew EPS 19. 3% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, JKHY leads at 6. 9% annualised revenue growth. 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 — COFS or FIS or JKHY or MBWM or IBCP?
Mercantile Bank Corporation (MBWM) is the more profitable company, earning 23.
9% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 23. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MBWM leads at 27. 5% versus 16. 5% for FIS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — IBCP leads at 69. 6%, 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 COFS or FIS or JKHY or MBWM or IBCP 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, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 31x versus Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. 's 2. 16x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) trades at 7. 5x forward P/E versus 21. 8x for Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. — 14. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 42. 6% to $67. 38.
08Which pays a better dividend — COFS or FIS or JKHY or MBWM or IBCP?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
ChoiceOne Financial Services, Inc. (COFS) offers the highest yield at 3. 8%, versus 1. 5% for Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. (JKHY).
09Is COFS or FIS or JKHY or MBWM or IBCP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Jack Henry & Associates, Inc.
(JKHY) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 28), 1. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (JKHY: +94. 9%, COFS: +102. 0%), 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 COFS and FIS and JKHY and MBWM and IBCP?
These companies operate in different sectors (COFS (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology) and JKHY (Technology) and MBWM (Financial Services) and IBCP (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: COFS is a small-cap high-growth stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; JKHY is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MBWM is a small-cap deep-value stock; IBCP is a small-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.
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.