FBK vs ICE

For growth investors, FB Financial Corporation (FBK) is the stronger pick with 14.

5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 5% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). FB Financial Corporation (FBK) offers the better valuation at 22. 0x trailing P/E (11. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate FB Financial Corporation (FBK) 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.

On trailing P/E, FB Financial Corporation (FBK) is the cheapest at 22.

0x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. at 25. 6x. On forward P/E, FB Financial Corporation is actually cheaper at 11. 2x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: FB Financial Corporation wins at 1. 50x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 06x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) delivered a total return of +42. 3%, compared to +32. 9% for FB Financial Corporation (FBK). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ICE returned +197. 3% versus FBK's +174. 7%. 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. 36β versus FB Financial Corporation's 0. 93β — meaning FBK is approximately 158% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, FB Financial Corporation (FBK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 70% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), FB Financial Corporation (FBK) is pulling ahead at 14.

5% 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 -3. 2% for FB Financial Corporation. 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 14. 0% for FB Financial Corporation — 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 15. 8% for FBK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ICE leads at 61. 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.

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, FB Financial Corporation (FBK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 50x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 06x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, FB Financial Corporation (FBK) trades at 11. 2x forward P/E versus 18. 3x for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — 7. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 32. 9% to $196. 43.

In this comparison, ICE (1.

3% yield) pays a dividend. FBK does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

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. 36), 1. 3% yield, +197. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +197. 3%, FBK: +174. 7%), 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.

ICE pays a dividend while FBK 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.