EFSC vs ICE

For growth investors, Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC) is the stronger pick with 12.

0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 5% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC) offers the better valuation at 11. 2x trailing P/E (10. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC) a "Buy" — based on 9 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, Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC) is the cheapest at 11.

2x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. at 27. 1x. On forward P/E, Enterprise Financial Services Corp is actually cheaper at 10. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Enterprise Financial Services Corp wins at 0. 77x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 19x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) delivered a total return of +43. 4%, compared to +28. 1% for Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ICE returned +225. 3% versus EFSC's +153. 5%. 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), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 33β versus Enterprise Financial Services Corp's 0. 90β — meaning EFSC is approximately 173% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 25% versus 70% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC) is pulling ahead at 12.

0% versus 7. 5% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. grew EPS 20. 7% year-over-year, compared to 9. 9% for Enterprise Financial Services Corp. 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.

Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus 22. 1% for Enterprise Financial Services Corp — 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 31. 1% for EFSC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EFSC leads at 68. 4%, 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, Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 77x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 19x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC) trades at 10. 7x forward P/E versus 19. 5x for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — 8. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 25. 3% to $195. 71.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Enterprise Financial Services Corp (EFSC) offers the highest yield at 2. 0%, versus 1. 2% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE).

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. 33), 1. 2% yield, +225. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +225. 3%, EFSC: +153. 5%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: EFSC is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder 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.