Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs WSFS vs PFIS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs WSFS vs PFIS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $1.90B | $2.35B | $4.13B | $3.80B | $590M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $729M | $867M | $1.89B | $1.36B | $281M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $152M | $169M | $392M | $287M | $59M |
| Gross Margin | 67.6% | 72.1% | 67.4% | 74.7% | 66.6% |
| Operating Margin | 27.2% | 25.3% | 25.7% | 28.0% | 25.7% |
| Forward P/E | 10.7x | 10.8x | 10.6x | 11.8x | 9.0x |
| Total Debt | $452M | $327M | $1.30B | $303M | $258M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $103M | $185M | $271M | $1.33B | $58M |
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs WSFS vs PFIS — 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% |
| WSFS Financial Corp… (WSFS) | 100 | 260.4 | +160.4% |
| Peoples Financial S… (PFIS) | 100 | 178.4 | +78.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs WSFS vs PFIS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FCF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and bank quality.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.72, Low D/E 29.1%, current ratio 0.37x
- NIM 3.4% vs NBTB's 3.1%
- Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBTB's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- Beta 0.72 vs FULT's 1.13, lower leverage
NBTB lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, FULT doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
WSFS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- 129.0% 10Y total return vs FCF's 160.1%
- PEG 0.67 vs NBTB's 1.53
- PEG 0.67 vs 0.74
- +37.7% vs NBTB's +9.0%
PFIS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 9 yrs, beta 0.82, yield 4.1%
- Rev growth 22.3%, EPS growth 493.9%
- Beta 0.82, yield 4.1%, current ratio 8.76x
- 22.3% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 22.3% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1% | |
| Value | PEG 0.67 vs 0.74 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBTB's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.72 vs FULT's 1.13, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.1% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs NBTB's 3.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +37.7% vs NBTB's +9.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBTB's 0.5% |
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs WSFS vs PFIS — 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 WSFS vs PFIS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
WSFS leads in 3 of 6 categories
PFIS leads 1 • FCF leads 0 • NBTB leads 0 • FULT leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WSFS leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FULT is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.9B annually — 6.7x PFIS's $281M. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 21.1% (WSFS) to 19.5% (NBTB).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $729M | $867M | $1.9B | $1.4B | $281M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $205M | $241M | $529M | $408M | $80M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $152M | $169M | $392M | $287M | $59M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $172M | $225M | $267M | $214M | $43M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.6% | +72.1% | +67.4% | +74.7% | +66.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +27.2% | +25.3% | +25.7% | +28.0% | +25.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +20.9% | +19.5% | +20.7% | +21.1% | +21.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +23.5% | +25.2% | +15.0% | +15.7% | +15.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +22.9% | +39.5% | +47.2% | +22.9% | +95.1% |
Valuation Metrics
PFIS leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.0x trailing earnings, PFIS trades at a 29% valuation discount to WSFS's 14.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FULT offers better value at 0.74x vs NBTB's 1.92x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.9B | $2.4B | $4.1B | $3.8B | $590M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.3B | $2.5B | $5.2B | $2.8B | $790M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.65x | 13.53x | 10.31x | 14.16x | 10.03x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.70x | 10.80x | 10.61x | 11.79x | 9.02x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.88x | 1.92x | 0.74x | 0.81x | 1.25x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.99x | 10.35x | 9.74x | 6.80x | 10.94x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.61x | 2.71x | 2.18x | 2.79x | 2.10x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.24x | 1.21x | 1.13x | 1.44x | 1.14x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.09x | 10.75x | 14.52x | 17.79x | 13.61x |
Profitability & Efficiency
WSFS leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
PFIS delivers a 11.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $10 for NBTB. WSFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PFIS's 0.50x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NBTB scores 7/9 vs PFIS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.1% | +9.5% | +11.6% | +10.6% | +11.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.3% | +1.1% | +1.2% | +1.4% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.9% | +7.9% | +7.5% | +9.5% | +7.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.9% | +2.4% | +9.5% | +10.3% | +2.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.29x | 0.17x | 0.37x | 0.11x | 0.50x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $349M | $142M | $1.0B | -$1.0B | $200M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $103M | $185M | $271M | $1.3B | $58M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $452M | $327M | $1.3B | $303M | $258M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.96x | 1.05x | 0.84x | 1.30x | 0.77x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WSFS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PFIS five years ago would be worth $15,747 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,989 for NBTB. Over the past 12 months, WSFS leads with a +37.7% total return vs NBTB's +9.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WSFS at 33.0% vs NBTB's 15.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +11.7% | +9.3% | +11.1% | +31.2% | +23.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +22.0% | +9.0% | +29.6% | +37.7% | +34.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +68.1% | +54.1% | +130.4% | +135.3% | +70.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +38.2% | +29.9% | +41.4% | +43.1% | +57.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +160.1% | +102.2% | +106.1% | +129.0% | +93.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +18.9% | +15.5% | +32.1% | +33.0% | +19.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FCF and PFIS each lead in 1 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. PFIS currently trades 98.5% from its 52-week high vs FULT's 93.3% 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 | 0.89x | 0.82x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $19.14 | $46.92 | $22.99 | $73.22 | $59.86 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.00 | $39.20 | $16.60 | $49.92 | $43.64 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.2% | +96.1% | +93.3% | +98.4% | +98.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.6 | 57.3 | 55.8 | 64.0 | 60.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 866K | 236K | 2.0M | 385K | 53K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NBTB and PFIS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FCF as "Hold", NBTB as "Hold", FULT as "Hold", WSFS as "Hold", PFIS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 11.9% upside for FULT (target: $24) vs -5.0% for PFIS (target: $56). For income investors, PFIS offers the higher dividend yield at 4.15% vs WSFS's 0.95%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $20.50 | $46.00 | $24.00 | $74.67 | $56.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 18 | 10 | 20 | 13 | 1 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.9% | +3.2% | +3.6% | +0.9% | +4.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 9 | 12 | 2 | 1 | 9 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.54 | $1.43 | $0.77 | $0.68 | $2.45 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.9% | +0.4% | +1.6% | +7.6% | 0.0% |
WSFS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). PFIS leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
FCF vs NBTB vs FULT vs WSFS vs PFIS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FCF or NBTB or FULT or WSFS or PFIS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Peoples Financial Services Corp.
(PFIS) is the stronger pick with 22. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). Peoples Financial Services Corp. (PFIS) offers the better valuation at 10. 0x trailing P/E (9. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate First Commonwealth Financial Corporation (FCF) a "Hold" — based on 18 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 WSFS or PFIS?
On trailing P/E, Peoples Financial Services Corp.
(PFIS) is the cheapest at 10. 0x versus WSFS Financial Corporation at 14. 2x. On forward P/E, Peoples Financial Services Corp. is actually cheaper at 9. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: WSFS Financial Corporation wins at 0. 67x versus NBT Bancorp Inc. 's 1. 53x — 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 WSFS or PFIS?
Over the past 5 years, Peoples Financial Services Corp.
(PFIS) delivered a total return of +57. 5%, compared to +29. 9% for NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FCF returned +160. 1% versus PFIS's +93. 9%. 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 WSFS or PFIS?
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, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 50% for Peoples Financial Services Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FCF or NBTB or FULT or WSFS or PFIS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Peoples Financial Services Corp.
(PFIS) is pulling ahead at 22. 3% versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Peoples Financial Services Corp. grew EPS 493. 9% year-over-year, compared to 5. 8% for First Commonwealth 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.
06Which has better profit margins — FCF or NBTB or FULT or WSFS or PFIS?
WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the more profitable company, earning 21.
1% net margin versus 19. 5% for NBT Bancorp Inc. — meaning it keeps 21. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WSFS leads at 28. 0% versus 25. 3% for NBTB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WSFS leads at 74. 7%, 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 WSFS or PFIS 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, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 67x versus NBT Bancorp Inc. 's 1. 53x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Peoples Financial Services Corp. (PFIS) trades at 9. 0x forward P/E versus 11. 8x for WSFS Financial Corporation — 2. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FULT: 11. 9% to $24. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — FCF or NBTB or FULT or WSFS or PFIS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Peoples Financial Services Corp. (PFIS) offers the highest yield at 4. 1%, versus 0. 9% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS).
09Is FCF or NBTB or FULT or WSFS or PFIS 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 WSFS and PFIS?
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: FCF is a small-cap deep-value stock; NBTB is a small-cap deep-value stock; FULT is a small-cap deep-value stock; WSFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; PFIS is a small-cap high-growth 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.