Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Information Technology Services
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs IBCP 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 | $1.90B | $2.35B | $4.13B | $699M | $24.47B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $729M | $867M | $1.89B | $315M | $10.89B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $152M | $169M | $392M | $69M | $382M |
| Gross Margin | 67.6% | 72.1% | 67.4% | 69.6% | 38.1% |
| Operating Margin | 27.2% | 25.3% | 25.7% | 25.8% | 17.5% |
| Forward P/E | 10.7x | 10.8x | 10.6x | 9.6x | 7.5x |
| Total Debt | $452M | $327M | $1.30B | $117M | $4.01B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $103M | $185M | $271M | $52M | $599M |
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Commonwealth … (FCF) | 100 | 227.4 | +127.4% |
| NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) | 100 | 143.9 | +43.9% |
| Fulton Financial Co… (FULT) | 100 | 191.3 | +91.3% |
| Independent Bank Co… (IBCP) | 100 | 245.7 | +145.7% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 34.0 | -66.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FCF ranks third and is worth considering specifically for bank quality.
- NIM 3.4% vs NBTB's 3.1%
- Beta 0.72 vs FULT's 1.13, lower leverage
NBTB is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 3.2%
- Rev growth 10.4%, EPS growth 12.5%
- 10.4% NII/revenue growth vs IBCP's -0.3%
FULT has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in dividends and momentum.
- 3.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs NBTB's 3.2%
- +29.6% vs FIS's -35.3%
IBCP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 184.6% 10Y total return vs FCF's 160.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.83, Low D/E 23.2%, current ratio 370.62x
- 21.7% margin vs FIS's 3.5%
- 1.3% ROA vs NBTB's 1.1%, ROIC 10.2% vs 7.9%
FIS is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency and defensive.
- PEG 0.31 vs IBCP's 1.82
- Beta 0.76, yield 3.5%, current ratio 0.59x
- Lower P/E (7.5x vs 10.8x), PEG 0.31 vs 1.53
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.4% NII/revenue growth vs IBCP's -0.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.5x vs 10.8x), PEG 0.31 vs 1.53 | |
| Quality / Margins | 21.7% margin vs FIS's 3.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.72 vs FULT's 1.13, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs NBTB's 3.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +29.6% vs FIS's -35.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.3% ROA vs NBTB's 1.1%, ROIC 10.2% vs 7.9% |
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IBCP leads in 2 of 6 categories
FIS leads 1 • FULT leads 1 • FCF leads 1 • NBTB leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FIS leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FIS is the larger business by revenue, generating $10.9B annually — 34.5x IBCP's $315M. IBCP is the more profitable business, keeping 21.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FIS's 3.5%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $729M | $867M | $1.9B | $315M | $10.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $205M | $241M | $529M | $89M | $3.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $152M | $169M | $392M | $69M | $382M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $172M | $225M | $267M | $70M | $2.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.6% | +72.1% | +67.4% | +69.6% | +38.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +27.2% | +25.3% | +25.7% | +25.8% | +17.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +20.9% | +19.5% | +20.7% | +21.7% | +3.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +23.5% | +25.2% | +15.0% | +22.2% | +26.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | +8.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +22.9% | +39.5% | +47.2% | +2.3% | +92.3% |
Valuation Metrics
FULT leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.3x trailing earnings, FULT trades at a 84% valuation discount to FIS's 63.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FULT offers better value at 0.74x vs FIS's 2.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.9B | $2.4B | $4.1B | $699M | $24.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.3B | $2.5B | $5.2B | $764M | $27.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.65x | 13.53x | 10.31x | 10.38x | 63.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.70x | 10.80x | 10.61x | 9.56x | 7.54x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.88x | 1.92x | 0.74x | 1.97x | 2.58x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.99x | 10.35x | 9.74x | 9.39x | 7.66x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.61x | 2.71x | 2.18x | 2.22x | 2.29x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.24x | 1.21x | 1.13x | 1.41x | 1.76x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.09x | 10.75x | 14.52x | 9.96x | 9.97x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IBCP leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IBCP delivers a 14.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $3 for FIS. NBTB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FULT's 0.37x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IBCP scores 8/9 vs FIS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.1% | +9.5% | +11.6% | +14.2% | +2.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.3% | +1.1% | +1.2% | +1.3% | +1.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.9% | +7.9% | +7.5% | +10.2% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.9% | +2.4% | +9.5% | +2.6% | +6.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.29x | 0.17x | 0.37x | 0.23x | 0.29x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $349M | $142M | $1.0B | $65M | $3.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $103M | $185M | $271M | $52M | $599M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $452M | $327M | $1.3B | $117M | $4.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.96x | 1.05x | 0.84x | 0.91x | 4.64x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IBCP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IBCP five years ago would be worth $16,369 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,685 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, FULT leads with a +29.6% total return vs FIS's -35.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IBCP at 32.1% vs FIS's -2.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +11.7% | +9.3% | +11.1% | +7.2% | -27.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +22.0% | +9.0% | +29.6% | +12.6% | -35.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +68.1% | +54.1% | +130.4% | +130.6% | -6.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +38.2% | +29.9% | +41.4% | +63.7% | -63.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +160.1% | +102.2% | +106.1% | +184.6% | -13.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +18.9% | +15.5% | +32.1% | +32.1% | -2.2% |
Risk & Volatility
FCF leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FCF is the less volatile stock with a 0.72 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FULT's 1.13 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FCF currently trades 97.2% 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 | 0.72x | 0.89x | 1.13x | 0.83x | 0.76x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $19.14 | $46.92 | $22.99 | $37.39 | $82.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.00 | $39.20 | $16.60 | $29.63 | $43.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.2% | +96.1% | +93.3% | +90.8% | +57.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.6 | 57.3 | 55.8 | 50.6 | 43.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 866K | 236K | 2.0M | 176K | 5.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NBTB and FULT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FCF as "Hold", NBTB as "Hold", FULT as "Hold", IBCP as "Hold", FIS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.6% upside for FIS (target: $67) vs 2.1% for NBTB (target: $46). For income investors, FULT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.59% vs FCF's 2.88%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $20.50 | $46.00 | $24.00 | $38.00 | $67.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 18 | 10 | 20 | 7 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.9% | +3.2% | +3.6% | +3.0% | +3.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 9 | 12 | 2 | 11 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.54 | $1.43 | $0.77 | $1.03 | $1.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.9% | +0.4% | +1.6% | +1.8% | 0.0% |
IBCP leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). FIS leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FCF or NBTB or FULT or IBCP or FIS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is the stronger pick with 10. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 3% for Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP). Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) offers the better valuation at 10. 3x trailing P/E (10. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) a "Buy" — based on 37 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 — FCF or NBTB or FULT or IBCP or FIS?
On trailing P/E, Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) is the cheapest at 10.
3x 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 Independent Bank Corporation's 1. 82x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FCF or NBTB or FULT or IBCP or FIS?
Over the past 5 years, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) delivered a total return of +63.
7%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IBCP returned +184. 6% 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 — FCF or NBTB or FULT or IBCP or FIS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), First Commonwealth Financial Corporation (FCF) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
72β versus Fulton Financial Corporation's 1. 13β — meaning FULT is approximately 58% more volatile than FCF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 37% for Fulton Financial Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FCF or NBTB or FULT or IBCP or FIS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is pulling ahead at 10. 4% versus -0. 3% for Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fulton Financial Corporation grew EPS 32. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — FCF or NBTB or FULT or IBCP or FIS?
Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) is the more profitable company, earning 21.
7% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 21. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FCF leads at 27. 2% versus 16. 5% for FIS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NBTB leads at 72. 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.
07Is FCF or NBTB or FULT or IBCP 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 Independent Bank Corporation's 1. 82x. 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 10. 8x for NBT Bancorp Inc. — 3. 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 — FCF or NBTB or FULT or IBCP or FIS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) offers the highest yield at 3. 6%, versus 2. 9% for First Commonwealth Financial Corporation (FCF).
09Is FCF or NBTB or FULT or IBCP or FIS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, First Commonwealth Financial Corporation (FCF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
72), 2. 9% yield, +160. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FCF: +160. 1%, FULT: +106. 1%), 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 FCF and NBTB and FULT and IBCP and FIS?
These companies operate in different sectors (FCF (Financial Services) and NBTB (Financial Services) and FULT (Financial Services) and IBCP (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: FCF is a small-cap deep-value stock; NBTB is a small-cap deep-value stock; FULT is a small-cap deep-value stock; IBCP is a small-cap deep-value 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.