Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
FINW vs AFRM vs UPST vs LC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Infrastructure
Financial - Credit Services
Financial - Credit Services
FINW vs AFRM vs UPST vs LC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Software - Infrastructure | Financial - Credit Services | Financial - Credit Services |
| Market Cap | $192M | $22.44B | $2.78B | $1.92B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $151M | $3.20B | $1.08B | $1.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $16M | $382M | $49M | $136M |
| Gross Margin | 61.0% | 62.6% | 95.2% | 64.7% |
| Operating Margin | 14.4% | 10.2% | 5.1% | 25.0% |
| Forward P/E | 12.0x | 56.4x | 13.5x | 9.5x |
| Total Debt | $4M | $7.85B | $1.85B | $16M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $163M | $1.35B | $657M | $918M |
FINW vs AFRM vs UPST vs LC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| FinWise Bancorp (FINW) | 100 | 104.9 | +4.9% |
| Affirm Holdings, In… (AFRM) | 100 | 50.5 | -49.5% |
| Upstart Holdings, I… (UPST) | 100 | 14.1 | -85.9% |
| LendingClub Corpora… (LC) | 100 | 50.8 | -49.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FINW vs AFRM vs UPST vs LC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FINW is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- beta 0.75
- 10.0% 10Y total return vs LC's -27.7%
- NIM 7.4% vs UPST's 5.1%
- Beta 0.75 vs UPST's 2.96, lower leverage
AFRM has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in quality and efficiency.
- 11.9% margin vs UPST's 5.0%
- 3.1% ROA vs LC's 1.2%, ROIC -0.7% vs 17.3%
UPST is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 58.9%, EPS growth 131.3%
- 58.9% NII/revenue growth vs LC's 15.0%
LC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 2.36, Low D/E 1.1%, current ratio 466.38x
- Beta 2.36, current ratio 466.38x
- Lower P/E (9.5x vs 13.5x)
- +62.4% vs UPST's -37.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 58.9% NII/revenue growth vs LC's 15.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.5x vs 13.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 11.9% margin vs UPST's 5.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.75 vs UPST's 2.96, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +62.4% vs UPST's -37.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 3.1% ROA vs LC's 1.2%, ROIC -0.7% vs 17.3% |
FINW vs AFRM vs UPST vs LC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FINW vs AFRM vs UPST vs LC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FINW leads in 1 of 6 categories
AFRM leads 1 • UPST leads 0 • LC leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — AFRM and LC each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AFRM is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.2B annually — 21.2x FINW's $151M. AFRM is the more profitable business, keeping 11.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UPST's 5.0%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $151M | $3.2B | $1.1B | $1.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $23M | $533M | $68M | $287M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $16M | $382M | $49M | $136M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$1.5B | $787M | -$146M | -$2.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +61.0% | +62.6% | +95.2% | +64.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +14.4% | +10.2% | +5.1% | +25.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.7% | +11.9% | +5.0% | +10.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -37.8% | +24.6% | -15.4% | -2.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -65.8% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -13.0% | — | -169.2% | +3.2% |
Valuation Metrics
FINW leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.4x trailing earnings, FINW trades at a 97% valuation discount to AFRM's 449.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, FINW's 1.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than AFRM's 210.0x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $192M | $22.4B | $2.8B | $1.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $33M | $28.9B | $4.0B | $1.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.39x | 449.07x | 64.44x | 14.51x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.01x | 56.43x | 13.46x | 9.52x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 4.49x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 1.51x | 209.99x | 50.13x | 2.57x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.27x | 6.96x | 2.58x | 1.44x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.98x | 7.48x | 3.90x | 1.32x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 37.29x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — AFRM and LC each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AFRM delivers a 11.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $7 for UPST. LC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AFRM's 2.56x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AFRM scores 6/9 vs FINW's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.2% | +11.2% | +6.6% | +9.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.7% | +3.1% | +1.7% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.7% | -0.7% | +1.7% | +17.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.4% | -0.9% | +2.4% | +3.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 2.56x | 2.32x | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$159M | $6.5B | $1.2B | -$902M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $163M | $1.4B | $657M | $918M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4M | $7.9B | $1.9B | $16M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.98x | 1.88x | 1.66x | 0.67x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AFRM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AFRM five years ago would be worth $12,474 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,022 for UPST. Over the past 12 months, LC leads with a +62.4% total return vs UPST's -37.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AFRM at 78.0% vs FINW's 19.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.7% | -9.0% | -36.7% | -12.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1.0% | +30.7% | -37.6% | +62.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +69.5% | +464.2% | +116.7% | +142.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +10.0% | +24.7% | -69.8% | +15.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +10.0% | -30.7% | -1.6% | -27.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +19.2% | +78.0% | +29.4% | +34.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FINW and LC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FINW is the less volatile stock with a 0.75 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than UPST's 2.96 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LC currently trades 77.0% from its 52-week high vs UPST's 33.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.72x | 2.61x | 2.87x | 2.32x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $22.49 | $100.00 | $87.30 | $21.67 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.30 | $42.09 | $23.96 | $9.70 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +62.2% | +67.4% | +33.2% | +77.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 22.7 | 63.1 | 42.7 | 57.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 14K | 5.3M | 4.8M | 2.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FINW as "Buy", AFRM as "Buy", UPST as "Buy", LC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 39.3% upside for FINW (target: $20) vs 21.3% for AFRM (target: $82).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $19.50 | $81.71 | $38.29 | $22.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 33 | 22 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
FINW leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). AFRM leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
FINW vs AFRM vs UPST vs LC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FINW or AFRM or UPST or LC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Upstart Holdings, Inc.
(UPST) is the stronger pick with 58. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 15. 0% for LendingClub Corporation (LC). FinWise Bancorp (FINW) offers the better valuation at 12. 4x trailing P/E (12. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate FinWise Bancorp (FINW) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — FINW or AFRM or UPST or LC?
On trailing P/E, FinWise Bancorp (FINW) is the cheapest at 12.
4x versus Affirm Holdings, Inc. at 449. 1x. On forward P/E, LendingClub Corporation is actually cheaper at 9. 5x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FINW or AFRM or UPST or LC?
Over the past 5 years, Affirm Holdings, Inc.
(AFRM) delivered a total return of +24. 7%, compared to -69. 8% for Upstart Holdings, Inc. (UPST). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FINW returned +6. 3% versus AFRM's -34. 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 — FINW or AFRM or UPST or LC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), FinWise Bancorp (FINW) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
72β versus Upstart Holdings, Inc. 's 2. 87β — meaning UPST is approximately 297% more volatile than FINW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, LendingClub Corporation (LC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 3% for Affirm Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FINW or AFRM or UPST or LC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Upstart Holdings, Inc.
(UPST) is pulling ahead at 58. 9% versus 15. 0% for LendingClub Corporation (LC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LendingClub Corporation grew EPS 155. 6% year-over-year, compared to 21. 5% for FinWise 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.
06Which has better profit margins — FINW or AFRM or UPST or LC?
FinWise Bancorp (FINW) is the more profitable company, earning 10.
7% net margin versus 1. 6% for Affirm Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 10. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LC leads at 25. 0% versus -2. 7% for AFRM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UPST leads at 95. 2%, 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 FINW or AFRM or UPST or LC more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, LendingClub Corporation (LC) trades at 9.
5x forward P/E versus 56. 4x for Affirm Holdings, Inc. — 46. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FINW: 39. 3% to $19. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — FINW or AFRM or UPST or LC?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is FINW or AFRM or UPST or LC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, FinWise Bancorp (FINW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
72)). Affirm Holdings, Inc. (AFRM) carries a higher beta of 2. 61 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FINW: +6. 3%, AFRM: -34. 2%), 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 FINW and AFRM and UPST and LC?
These companies operate in different sectors (FINW (Financial Services) and AFRM (Technology) and UPST (Financial Services) and LC (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: FINW is a small-cap high-growth stock; AFRM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; UPST is a small-cap high-growth stock; LC is a small-cap deep-value 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.