Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
EBMT vs GBCI vs WAFD vs NWBI vs FIS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Information Technology Services
EBMT vs GBCI vs WAFD vs NWBI vs FIS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Information Technology Services |
| Market Cap | $182M | $6.35B | $2.73B | $2.02B | $24.47B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $126M | $1.43B | $1.41B | $877M | $10.89B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $15M | $239M | $243M | $126M | $382M |
| Gross Margin | 70.9% | 69.0% | 50.9% | 68.3% | 38.1% |
| Operating Margin | 15.0% | 22.9% | 20.5% | 18.8% | 17.5% |
| Forward P/E | 11.2x | 15.8x | 10.9x | 10.2x | 7.5x |
| Total Debt | $82M | $2.90B | $1.82B | $446M | $4.01B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $24M | $322M | $657M | $234M | $599M |
EBMT vs GBCI vs WAFD vs NWBI vs FIS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eagle Bancorp Monta… (EBMT) | 100 | 132.2 | +32.2% |
| Glacier Bancorp, In… (GBCI) | 100 | 118.5 | +18.5% |
| WaFd, Inc. (WAFD) | 100 | 137.9 | +37.9% |
| Northwest Bancshare… (NWBI) | 100 | 138.9 | +38.9% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 34.0 | -66.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EBMT vs GBCI vs WAFD vs NWBI vs FIS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EBMT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and bank quality.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.57, Low D/E 43.0%, current ratio 0.71x
- NIM 3.4% vs WAFD's 2.5%
- Beta 0.57 vs GBCI's 1.17, lower leverage
- 2.6% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs NWBI's 5.4%
GBCI ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 145.4% 10Y total return vs EBMT's 114.0%
- 16.8% margin vs FIS's 3.5%
Among these 5 stocks, WAFD doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
NWBI is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.73, yield 5.4%
- Rev growth 16.3%, EPS growth 16.5%
- Beta 0.73, yield 5.4%, current ratio 0.13x
- 16.3% NII/revenue growth vs WAFD's -1.6%
FIS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.31 vs WAFD's 3.55
- Lower P/E (7.5x vs 10.2x), PEG 0.31 vs 1.24
- 1.1% ROA vs EBMT's 0.7%, ROIC 6.0% vs 4.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.3% NII/revenue growth vs WAFD's -1.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.5x vs 10.2x), PEG 0.31 vs 1.24 | |
| Quality / Margins | 16.8% margin vs FIS's 3.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.57 vs GBCI's 1.17, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs NWBI's 5.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +32.2% vs FIS's -35.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.1% ROA vs EBMT's 0.7%, ROIC 6.0% vs 4.4% |
EBMT vs GBCI vs WAFD vs NWBI vs FIS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
EBMT vs GBCI vs WAFD vs NWBI vs FIS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EBMT leads in 3 of 6 categories
GBCI leads 0 • WAFD leads 0 • NWBI leads 0 • FIS leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — GBCI and FIS each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FIS is the larger business by revenue, generating $10.9B annually — 86.5x EBMT's $126M. GBCI is the more profitable business, keeping 16.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FIS's 3.5%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $126M | $1.4B | $1.4B | $877M | $10.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $26M | $365M | $277M | $166M | $3.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $15M | $239M | $243M | $126M | $382M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $28M | $337M | $226M | $142M | $2.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.9% | +69.0% | +50.9% | +68.3% | +38.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +15.0% | +22.9% | +20.5% | +18.8% | +17.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.8% | +16.8% | +16.0% | +14.4% | +3.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +22.5% | +24.4% | +14.8% | +16.2% | +26.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | +8.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +36.4% | -9.3% | +46.3% | +19.2% | +92.3% |
Valuation Metrics
EBMT leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.0x trailing earnings, EBMT trades at a 81% valuation discount to FIS's 63.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NWBI offers better value at 1.83x vs WAFD's 4.41x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $182M | $6.3B | $2.7B | $2.0B | $24.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $240M | $8.9B | $3.9B | $2.2B | $27.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.03x | 24.52x | 13.56x | 15.03x | 63.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.22x | 15.81x | 10.93x | 10.20x | 7.54x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 4.41x | 1.83x | 2.58x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.32x | 24.45x | 12.98x | 13.57x | 7.66x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.45x | 4.45x | 1.93x | 2.31x | 2.29x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.93x | 1.51x | 0.94x | 1.07x | 1.76x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.42x | 18.26x | 13.09x | 14.27x | 9.97x |
Profitability & Efficiency
EBMT leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
EBMT delivers a 8.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $8 in annual profit, vs $3 for FIS. NWBI carries lower financial leverage with a 0.24x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GBCI's 0.69x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), EBMT scores 9/9 vs FIS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.1% | +6.5% | +8.0% | +7.2% | +2.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.7% | +0.8% | +1.0% | +0.8% | +1.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.4% | +3.5% | +3.9% | +5.6% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.8% | +1.7% | +5.7% | +6.8% | +6.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 9 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.43x | 0.69x | 0.60x | 0.24x | 0.29x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $58M | $2.6B | $1.2B | $213M | $3.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $24M | $322M | $657M | $234M | $599M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $82M | $2.9B | $1.8B | $446M | $4.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.53x | 0.80x | 0.48x | 0.73x | 4.64x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
EBMT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NWBI five years ago would be worth $12,663 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,685 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, EBMT leads with a +32.2% total return vs FIS's -35.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EBMT at 26.4% vs FIS's -2.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +17.6% | +10.0% | +11.9% | +18.8% | -27.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +32.2% | +21.8% | +28.5% | +18.3% | -35.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +101.8% | +84.8% | +51.6% | +56.2% | -6.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +11.3% | -9.3% | +22.5% | +26.6% | -63.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +114.0% | +145.4% | +84.4% | +52.3% | -13.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +26.4% | +22.7% | +14.9% | +16.0% | -2.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — EBMT and WAFD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EBMT is the less volatile stock with a 0.57 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GBCI's 1.17 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WAFD currently trades 98.8% 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 | 0.57x | 1.17x | 0.81x | 0.73x | 0.76x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $23.95 | $53.99 | $36.12 | $14.26 | $82.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.10 | $39.90 | $26.31 | $11.25 | $43.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +95.5% | +90.4% | +98.8% | +97.0% | +57.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.7 | 60.6 | 68.3 | 64.4 | 43.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 60K | 872K | 661K | 1.3M | 5.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — EBMT and NWBI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EBMT as "Hold", GBCI as "Buy", WAFD as "Hold", NWBI as "Hold", FIS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.6% upside for FIS (target: $67) vs -1.9% for WAFD (target: $35). For income investors, NWBI offers the higher dividend yield at 5.42% vs EBMT's 2.56%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $24.00 | $57.33 | $35.00 | $14.67 | $67.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 6 | 14 | 11 | 14 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +2.6% | +3.0% | +5.4% | +3.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 14 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.59 | $1.25 | $1.05 | $0.75 | $1.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.9% | 0.0% | +3.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
EBMT leads in 3 of 6 categories — strongest in Valuation Metrics and Profitability & Efficiency. 3 categories are tied.
EBMT vs GBCI vs WAFD vs NWBI vs FIS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EBMT or GBCI or WAFD or NWBI or FIS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Northwest Bancshares, Inc.
(NWBI) is the stronger pick with 16. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for WaFd, Inc. (WAFD). Eagle Bancorp Montana, Inc. (EBMT) offers the better valuation at 12. 0x trailing P/E (11. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Glacier Bancorp, Inc. (GBCI) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — EBMT or GBCI or WAFD or NWBI or FIS?
On trailing P/E, Eagle Bancorp Montana, Inc.
(EBMT) is the cheapest at 12. 0x 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 WaFd, Inc. 's 3. 55x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EBMT or GBCI or WAFD or NWBI or FIS?
Over the past 5 years, Northwest Bancshares, Inc.
(NWBI) delivered a total return of +26. 6%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GBCI returned +145. 4% 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 — EBMT or GBCI or WAFD or NWBI or FIS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Eagle Bancorp Montana, Inc.
(EBMT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 57β versus Glacier Bancorp, Inc. 's 1. 17β — meaning GBCI is approximately 103% more volatile than EBMT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Northwest Bancshares, Inc. (NWBI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 24% versus 69% for Glacier Bancorp, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EBMT or GBCI or WAFD or NWBI or FIS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Northwest Bancshares, Inc.
(NWBI) is pulling ahead at 16. 3% versus -1. 6% for WaFd, Inc. (WAFD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Eagle Bancorp Montana, Inc. grew EPS 53. 2% 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 — EBMT or GBCI or WAFD or NWBI or FIS?
Glacier Bancorp, Inc.
(GBCI) is the more profitable company, earning 16. 8% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 16. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GBCI leads at 22. 9% versus 15. 0% for EBMT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EBMT leads at 70. 9%, 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 EBMT or GBCI or WAFD or NWBI 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. 31x versus WaFd, Inc. 's 3. 55x. 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 15. 8x for Glacier Bancorp, Inc. — 8. 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 — EBMT or GBCI or WAFD or NWBI or FIS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Northwest Bancshares, Inc. (NWBI) offers the highest yield at 5. 4%, versus 2. 6% for Eagle Bancorp Montana, Inc. (EBMT).
09Is EBMT or GBCI or WAFD or NWBI or FIS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Eagle Bancorp Montana, Inc.
(EBMT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 57), 2. 6% yield, +114. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (EBMT: +114. 0%, GBCI: +145. 4%), 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 EBMT and GBCI and WAFD and NWBI and FIS?
These companies operate in different sectors (EBMT (Financial Services) and GBCI (Financial Services) and WAFD (Financial Services) and NWBI (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: EBMT is a small-cap deep-value stock; GBCI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; WAFD is a small-cap deep-value stock; NWBI is a small-cap high-growth 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.
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.