Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CWBC vs BANR vs JPM vs ICE vs FIS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Diversified
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Information Technology Services
CWBC vs BANR vs JPM vs ICE vs FIS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Diversified | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Information Technology Services |
| Market Cap | $494M | $2.28B | $896.00B | $79.60B | $20.26B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $194M | $819M | $280.33B | $12.64B | $11.66B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $38M | $195M | $57.05B | $3.30B | $2.67B |
| Gross Margin | 72.5% | 79.0% | 60.0% | 61.9% | 37.6% |
| Operating Margin | 27.1% | 29.5% | 25.9% | 38.7% | 17.9% |
| Forward P/E | 11.9x | 10.9x | 14.4x | 17.3x | 6.2x |
| Total Debt | $143M | $373M | $942.38B | $20.28B | $4.01B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $119M | $183M | $343.34B | $837M | $599M |
CWBC vs BANR vs JPM vs ICE vs FIS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Community West Banc… (CWBC) | 100 | 305.8 | +205.8% |
| Banner Corporation (BANR) | 100 | 176.9 | +76.9% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 153.4 | +53.4% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 29.2 | -70.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CWBC vs BANR vs JPM vs ICE vs FIS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CWBC has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and bank quality.
- Rev growth 18.5%, EPS growth 344.4%
- NIM 3.7% vs JPM's 2.2%
- 18.5% NII/revenue growth vs BANR's -0.9%
- +40.9% vs FIS's -49.4%
Among these 5 stocks, BANR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs CWBC's 304.9%
- 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs FIS's 4.2%
ICE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.35, Low D/E 69.9%, current ratio 1.02x
- 26.1% margin vs CWBC's 19.7%
- Beta 0.35 vs JPM's 0.94, lower leverage
FIS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.61, yield 4.2%
- PEG 0.26 vs CWBC's 2.76
- Beta 0.61, yield 4.2%, current ratio 0.59x
- Lower P/E (6.2x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.26 vs 1.95
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.5% NII/revenue growth vs BANR's -0.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.2x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.26 vs 1.95 | |
| Quality / Margins | 26.1% margin vs CWBC's 19.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs JPM's 0.94, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs FIS's 4.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +40.9% vs FIS's -49.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.5% ROA vs CWBC's 1.1%, ROIC 6.0% vs 7.0% |
CWBC vs BANR vs JPM vs ICE vs FIS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CWBC vs BANR vs JPM vs ICE vs FIS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ICE leads in 1 of 6 categories
FIS leads 1 • JPM leads 1 • CWBC leads 0 • BANR leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 1445.5x CWBC's $194M. ICE is the more profitable business, keeping 26.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CWBC's 19.7%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $194M | $819M | $280.3B | $12.6B | $11.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $56M | $253M | $81.4B | $6.5B | $4.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $38M | $195M | $57.0B | $3.3B | $2.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $44M | $248M | $100.9B | $4.3B | $2.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +72.5% | +79.0% | +60.0% | +61.9% | +37.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +27.1% | +29.5% | +25.9% | +38.7% | +17.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +19.7% | +23.8% | +20.4% | +26.1% | +22.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +22.5% | +30.3% | +36.0% | +33.9% | +23.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | +30.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +61.1% | +11.2% | +16.0% | +23.1% | +30.6% |
Valuation Metrics
FIS leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.9x trailing earnings, BANR trades at a 77% valuation discount to FIS's 52.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs CWBC's 2.99x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $494M | $2.3B | $896.0B | $79.6B | $20.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $517M | $2.5B | $1.50T | $99.0B | $23.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.88x | 11.92x | 16.00x | 24.36x | 52.27x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.89x | 10.92x | 14.40x | 17.34x | 6.24x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.99x | 1.03x | 0.90x | 2.74x | 2.14x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.85x | 9.77x | 18.36x | 15.34x | 6.50x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.54x | 2.78x | 3.20x | 6.30x | 1.90x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.20x | 1.19x | 2.47x | 2.77x | 1.46x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.32x | 9.19x | 8.88x | 18.56x | 7.21x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — BANR and FIS each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FIS delivers a 18.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $10 for CWBC. BANR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.19x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs JPM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.8% | +10.3% | +15.9% | +11.6% | +18.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.1% | +1.2% | +1.3% | +2.3% | +7.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.0% | +7.7% | +4.5% | +7.5% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.6% | +10.1% | +8.9% | +9.5% | +6.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.35x | 0.19x | 2.60x | 0.70x | 0.29x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $24M | $190M | $599.0B | $19.4B | $3.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $119M | $183M | $343.3B | $837M | $599M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $143M | $373M | $942.4B | $20.3B | $4.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.06x | 1.11x | 0.74x | 6.53x | 21.16x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,267 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, CWBC leads with a +40.9% total return vs FIS's -49.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs FIS's -6.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +17.9% | +9.3% | -0.5% | -11.8% | -38.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +40.9% | +11.1% | +21.8% | -20.4% | -49.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +132.6% | +59.7% | +138.2% | +34.6% | -18.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +117.4% | +35.1% | +118.2% | +30.9% | -67.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +304.9% | +101.5% | +465.8% | +195.3% | -25.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +32.5% | +16.9% | +33.6% | +10.4% | -6.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CWBC and ICE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ICE is the less volatile stock with a 0.35 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than JPM's 0.94 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CWBC currently trades 99.8% from its 52-week high vs FIS's 47.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.78x | 0.67x | 0.94x | 0.35x | 0.61x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $25.80 | $69.83 | $337.25 | $189.35 | $82.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.98 | $57.05 | $262.71 | $136.67 | $37.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.8% | +96.3% | +95.1% | +74.2% | +47.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 70.1 | 60.0 | 59.1 | 31.9 | 30.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 254K | 218K | 7.0M | 3.2M | 5.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — JPM and FIS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CWBC as "Buy", BANR as "Hold", JPM as "Buy", ICE as "Buy", FIS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 60.4% upside for FIS (target: $63) vs -4.4% for BANR (target: $64). For income investors, FIS offers the higher dividend yield at 4.16% vs ICE's 1.38%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $29.75 | $64.25 | $339.75 | $194.00 | $62.88 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 13 | 61 | 36 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.9% | +2.9% | +1.9% | +1.4% | +4.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 1 | 15 | 13 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.48 | $1.96 | $5.95 | $1.93 | $1.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.0% | +1.5% | +3.9% | +1.7% | +7.0% |
ICE leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). FIS leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
CWBC vs BANR vs JPM vs ICE vs FIS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CWBC or BANR or JPM or ICE or FIS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Community West Bancshares (CWBC) is the stronger pick with 18.
5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 9% for Banner Corporation (BANR). Banner Corporation (BANR) offers the better valuation at 11. 9x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Community West Bancshares (CWBC) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — CWBC or BANR or JPM or ICE or FIS?
On trailing P/E, Banner Corporation (BANR) is the cheapest at 11.
9x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 52. 3x. On forward P/E, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 2x — 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. 26x versus Community West Bancshares's 2. 76x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CWBC or BANR or JPM or ICE or FIS?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -67. 3% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus FIS's -25. 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 — CWBC or BANR or JPM or ICE or FIS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 35β versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. 's 0. 94β — meaning JPM is approximately 168% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Banner Corporation (BANR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 19% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CWBC or BANR or JPM or ICE or FIS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Community West Bancshares (CWBC) is pulling ahead at 18.
5% versus -0. 9% for Banner Corporation (BANR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Community West Bancshares grew EPS 344. 4% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information 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 — CWBC or BANR or JPM or ICE or FIS?
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 26. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus 16. 5% for FIS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BANR leads at 79. 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 CWBC or BANR or JPM or ICE or FIS 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. 26x versus Community West Bancshares's 2. 76x. 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 6. 2x forward P/E versus 17. 3x for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — 11. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 60. 4% to $62. 88.
08Which pays a better dividend — CWBC or BANR or JPM or ICE or FIS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) offers the highest yield at 4. 2%, versus 1. 4% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE).
09Is CWBC or BANR or JPM or ICE or FIS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 35), 1. 4% yield, +195. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +195. 3%, FIS: -25. 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 CWBC and BANR and JPM and ICE and FIS?
These companies operate in different sectors (CWBC (Financial Services) and BANR (Financial Services) and JPM (Financial Services) and ICE (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: CWBC is a small-cap high-growth stock; BANR is a small-cap deep-value stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.