FBK vs ICE vs FIS vs CME vs CBOE

For growth investors, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is the stronger pick with 15. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 4% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). 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 Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 57. 3x. On forward P/E, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 9x — 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. 28x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 06x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) delivered a total return of +211. 9%, compared to -65. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CBOE returned +452. 6% versus FIS's -21. 9%. 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), CME Group Inc.

(CME) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 25β versus FB Financial Corporation's 0. 93β — meaning FBK is approximately -466% more volatile than CME relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CME Group Inc. (CME) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 70% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is pulling ahead at 15. 1% versus 5. 4% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cboe Global Markets, Inc. grew EPS 44. 5% 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.

CME Group Inc.

(CME) is the more profitable company, earning 62. 0% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 62. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CME leads at 64. 9% versus 15. 8% for FBK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CME leads at 86. 1%, 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. 28x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 06x. 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. 9x forward P/E versus 25. 1x for Cboe Global Markets, Inc. — 18. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 46. 2% to $62. 88.

In this comparison, CME (4.

0% yield), FIS (3. 8% yield), ICE (1. 3% yield), CBOE (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. FBK does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 19), 0. 8% yield, +452. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CBOE: +452. 6%, 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (FBK (Financial Services) and ICE (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology) and CME (Financial Services) and CBOE (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: FBK is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; CME is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; CBOE is a mid-cap high-growth stock. ICE, FIS, CME, CBOE pay 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.