FHN vs FITB vs RF vs ZION

For growth investors, Zions Bancorporation, National Association (ZION) is the stronger pick with 8.

0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 0% for First Horizon Corporation (FHN). Regions Financial Corporation (RF) offers the better valuation at 12. 2x trailing P/E (10. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fifth Third Bancorp (FITB) a "Buy" — based on 51 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, Regions Financial Corporation (RF) is the cheapest at 12.

2x versus Fifth Third Bancorp at 15. 8x. On forward P/E, Zions Bancorporation, National Association is actually cheaper at 9. 7x — 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: Regions Financial Corporation wins at 0. 61x versus Zions Bancorporation, National Association's 2. 73x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, First Horizon Corporation (FHN) delivered a total return of +43.

6%, compared to +19. 7% for Zions Bancorporation, National Association (ZION). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RF returned +279. 6% versus FHN's +120. 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), First Horizon Corporation (FHN) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

07β versus Zions Bancorporation, National Association's 1. 35β — meaning ZION is approximately 26% more volatile than FHN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Regions Financial Corporation (RF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 26% versus 97% for Fifth Third Bancorp — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Zions Bancorporation, National Association (ZION) is pulling ahead at 8.

0% versus 1. 0% for First Horizon Corporation (FHN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: First Horizon Corporation grew EPS 38. 2% year-over-year, compared to -2. 5% for Fifth Third Bancorp. 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.

Regions Financial Corporation (RF) is the more profitable company, earning 22.

4% net margin versus 15. 7% for Zions Bancorporation, National Association — meaning it keeps 22. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RF leads at 28. 5% versus 20. 3% for ZION. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RF leads at 74. 6%, 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, Regions Financial Corporation (RF) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 61x versus Zions Bancorporation, National Association's 2. 73x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Zions Bancorporation, National Association (ZION) trades at 9. 7x forward P/E versus 16. 0x for Fifth Third Bancorp — 6. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FHN: 14. 4% to $28. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Regions Financial Corporation (RF) offers the highest yield at 3. 7%, versus 2. 6% for First Horizon Corporation (FHN).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Regions Financial Corporation (RF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.

08), 3. 7% yield, +279. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (RF: +279. 6%, ZION: +189. 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.

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.