CUBI vs WSFS vs NBTB vs AMSF vs FIS

For growth investors, NBT Bancorp Inc.

(NBTB) is the stronger pick with 10. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) offers the better valuation at 12. 3x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Customers Bancorp, Inc. (CUBI) a "Buy" — based on 17 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, AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) is the cheapest at 12. 3x 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 NBT Bancorp Inc. 's 1. 53x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Customers Bancorp, Inc.

(CUBI) delivered a total return of +122. 3%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CUBI returned +215. 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.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 23β versus Customers Bancorp, Inc. 's 1. 28β — meaning CUBI is approximately 454% more volatile than AMSF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 81% for Customers Bancorp, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), NBT Bancorp Inc.

(NBTB) is pulling ahead at 10. 4% versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Customers Bancorp, Inc. grew EPS 21. 8% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FIS leads at 3. 2% 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.

WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the more profitable company, earning 21.

1% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 21. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WSFS leads at 28. 0% versus 16. 5% for FIS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WSFS leads at 74. 7%, 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, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 31x versus NBT Bancorp Inc. 's 1. 53x. 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 14. 4x for AMERISAFE, Inc. — 6. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AMSF: 46. 9% to $44. 50.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) offers the highest yield at 8. 4%, versus 0. 4% for Customers Bancorp, Inc. (CUBI).

For long-horizon retirement investors, AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 23), 8. 4% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (AMSF: +31. 8%, CUBI: +215. 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (CUBI (Financial Services) and WSFS (Financial Services) and NBTB (Financial Services) and AMSF (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: CUBI is a small-cap deep-value stock; WSFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; NBTB is a small-cap deep-value stock; AMSF is a small-cap deep-value stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. WSFS, NBTB, AMSF, FIS pay a dividend while CUBI 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.