Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
COSO vs NBTB vs KO vs CZWI vs IBCP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
COSO vs NBTB vs KO vs CZWI vs IBCP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $323M | $2.52B | $355.61B | $207M | $730M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $136M | $902M | $49.28B | $90M | $310M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $25M | $169M | $13.70B | $14M | $69M |
| Gross Margin | 57.9% | 73.6% | 61.7% | 54.7% | 69.1% |
| Operating Margin | 23.0% | 24.3% | 29.3% | 7.0% | 26.2% |
| Forward P/E | 11.6x | 11.5x | 25.3x | 11.8x | 10.0x |
| Total Debt | $30M | $327M | $45.49B | $52M | $117M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $42M | $185M | $10.27B | $119M | $52M |
COSO vs NBTB vs KO vs CZWI vs IBCP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CoastalSouth Bancsh… (COSO) | 100 | 280.4 | +180.4% |
| NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) | 100 | 156.6 | +56.6% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| Citizens Community … (CZWI) | 100 | 312.8 | +212.8% |
| Independent Bank Co… (IBCP) | 100 | 238.9 | +138.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: COSO vs NBTB vs KO vs CZWI vs IBCP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
COSO is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.53 vs CZWI's 2.32
- Lower P/E (11.6x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.53 vs 2.26
NBTB has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.76, yield 3.0%
- Rev growth 10.4%, EPS growth 12.5%
- 10.4% NII/revenue growth vs CZWI's -9.4%
- 3.0% yield, 13-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 27.8% margin vs CZWI's 16.0%
- 13.1% ROA vs CZWI's 0.8%, ROIC 15.8% vs 2.0%
CZWI ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.50, Low D/E 27.6%, current ratio 3015.31x
- Beta 0.50, yield 1.7%, current ratio 3015.31x
- Beta 0.50 vs NBTB's 0.76
- +52.1% vs IBCP's +16.4%
IBCP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and bank quality.
- 194.4% 10Y total return vs CZWI's 149.0%
- NIM 3.3% vs CZWI's 2.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.4% NII/revenue growth vs CZWI's -9.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.6x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.53 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs CZWI's 16.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.50 vs NBTB's 0.76 | |
| Dividends | 3.0% yield, 13-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +52.1% vs IBCP's +16.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs CZWI's 0.8%, ROIC 15.8% vs 2.0% |
COSO vs NBTB vs KO vs CZWI vs IBCP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
COSO vs NBTB vs KO vs CZWI vs IBCP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories
COSO leads 1 • CZWI leads 1 • NBTB leads 0 • IBCP leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 547.2x CZWI's $90M. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CZWI's 16.0%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $136M | $902M | $49.3B | $90M | $310M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $31M | $241M | $15.5B | $9M | $89M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $25M | $169M | $13.7B | $14M | $69M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $63M | $225M | $12.6B | $11M | $70M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +57.9% | +73.6% | +61.7% | +54.7% | +69.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +23.0% | +24.3% | +29.3% | +7.0% | +26.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +18.4% | +18.8% | +27.8% | +16.0% | +22.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +46.6% | +24.9% | +25.5% | +12.4% | +22.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +12.1% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -26.7% | +39.5% | +18.2% | +63.0% | +2.3% |
Valuation Metrics
COSO leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.9x trailing earnings, IBCP trades at a 60% valuation discount to KO's 27.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), COSO offers better value at 0.57x vs CZWI's 2.90x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $323M | $2.5B | $355.6B | $207M | $730M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $311M | $2.7B | $390.8B | $140M | $795M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.48x | 14.47x | 27.18x | 14.70x | 10.85x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.62x | 11.54x | 25.27x | 11.79x | 9.99x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.57x | 2.06x | 2.43x | 2.90x | 2.06x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.31x | 11.03x | 26.39x | 15.69x | 9.78x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.38x | 2.90x | 7.42x | 2.29x | 2.32x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.20x | 1.29x | 10.40x | 1.11x | 1.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 5.27x | 11.49x | 67.15x | 19.90x | 10.41x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $8 for CZWI. COSO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.12x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IBCP scores 8/9 vs CZWI's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.8% | +9.5% | +41.1% | +7.8% | +14.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.1% | +1.1% | +13.1% | +0.8% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.4% | +7.9% | +15.8% | +2.0% | +10.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.4% | +2.4% | +17.3% | +0.6% | +2.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.12x | 0.17x | 1.33x | 0.28x | 0.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$12M | $142M | $35.2B | -$67M | $65M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $42M | $185M | $10.3B | $119M | $52M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $30M | $327M | $45.5B | $52M | $117M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.58x | 1.05x | 10.70x | 0.16x | 0.91x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CZWI leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IBCP five years ago would be worth $18,086 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,438 for NBTB. Over the past 12 months, CZWI leads with a +52.1% total return vs IBCP's +16.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CZWI at 36.4% vs KO's 13.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +16.7% | +17.6% | +20.3% | +24.3% | +12.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +35.3% | +18.3% | +17.2% | +52.1% | +16.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +86.6% | +48.5% | +47.0% | +153.7% | +110.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +58.1% | +44.4% | +65.6% | +69.0% | +80.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +35.2% | +108.5% | +121.1% | +149.0% | +194.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +23.1% | +14.1% | +13.7% | +36.4% | +28.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NBTB and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NBTB's 0.76 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NBTB currently trades 99.8% from its 52-week high vs IBCP's 90.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.51x | 0.76x | -0.20x | 0.50x | 0.72x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $27.42 | $48.27 | $84.04 | $22.62 | $39.16 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $19.24 | $39.20 | $65.35 | $12.83 | $29.63 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.3% | +99.8% | +98.3% | +94.9% | +90.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 68.7 | 63.1 | 60.6 | 51.2 | 61.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 92K | 266K | 12.7M | 41K | 135K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NBTB and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: COSO as "Buy", NBTB as "Hold", KO as "Buy", CZWI as "Buy", IBCP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 11.3% upside for COSO (target: $30) vs -4.5% for NBTB (target: $46). For income investors, NBTB offers the higher dividend yield at 2.96% vs CZWI's 1.73%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $30.00 | $46.00 | $86.13 | — | $38.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 10 | 48 | 2 | 7 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.0% | +2.5% | +1.7% | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 13 | 56 | 6 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.43 | $2.04 | $0.37 | $1.03 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.0% | +0.4% | +0.2% | +3.0% | +1.7% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). COSO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
COSO vs NBTB vs KO vs CZWI vs IBCP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is COSO or NBTB or KO or CZWI or IBCP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is the stronger pick with 10. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 4% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI). Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) offers the better valuation at 10. 9x trailing P/E (10. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate CoastalSouth Bancshares, Inc. (COSO) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — COSO or NBTB or KO or CZWI or IBCP?
On trailing P/E, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) is the cheapest at 10.
9x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, Independent Bank Corporation is actually cheaper at 10. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: CoastalSouth Bancshares, Inc. wins at 0. 53x versus Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. 's 2. 32x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — COSO or NBTB or KO or CZWI or IBCP?
Over the past 5 years, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) delivered a total return of +80.
9%, compared to +44. 4% for NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IBCP returned +194. 4% versus COSO's +35. 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 — COSO or NBTB or KO or CZWI or IBCP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus NBT Bancorp Inc. 's 0. 76β — meaning NBTB is approximately -480% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CoastalSouth Bancshares, Inc. (COSO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 12% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — COSO or NBTB or KO or CZWI or IBCP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is pulling ahead at 10. 4% versus -9. 4% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to 3. 3% for CoastalSouth Bancshares, 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 — COSO or NBTB or KO or CZWI or IBCP?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 16. 0% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 7. 0% for CZWI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NBTB leads at 72. 1%, 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 COSO or NBTB or KO or CZWI 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, CoastalSouth Bancshares, Inc. (COSO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 53x versus Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. 's 2. 32x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) trades at 10. 0x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 15. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for COSO: 11. 3% to $30. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — COSO or NBTB or KO or CZWI or IBCP?
In this comparison, NBTB (3.
0% yield), IBCP (2. 9% yield), KO (2. 5% yield), CZWI (1. 7% yield) pay a dividend. COSO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is COSO or NBTB or KO or CZWI or IBCP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, COSO: +35. 2%), 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 COSO and NBTB and KO and CZWI and IBCP?
These companies operate in different sectors (COSO (Financial Services) and NBTB (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and CZWI (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: COSO is a small-cap deep-value stock; NBTB is a small-cap deep-value stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; CZWI is a small-cap deep-value stock; IBCP is a small-cap deep-value stock. NBTB, KO, CZWI, IBCP pay a dividend while COSO 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.