Compare Stocks

4 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

FULT vs TRMK vs WSFS vs SFNC

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
FULT
Fulton Financial Corporation

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$4.15B
5Y Perf.+92.5%
TRMK
Trustmark Corporation

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$2.64B
5Y Perf.+88.1%
WSFS
WSFS Financial Corporation

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$3.79B
5Y Perf.+159.7%
SFNC
Simmons First National Corporation

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$3.10B
5Y Perf.+24.9%

FULT vs TRMK vs WSFS vs SFNC — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
FULT logoFULT
TRMK logoTRMK
WSFS logoWSFS
SFNC logoSFNC
IndustryBanks - RegionalBanks - RegionalBanks - RegionalBanks - Regional
Market Cap$4.15B$2.64B$3.79B$3.10B
Revenue (TTM)$1.89B$1.12B$1.36B$627M
Net Income (TTM)$392M$224M$287M$-398M
Gross Margin67.4%71.0%74.7%5.8%
Operating Margin25.7%25.5%28.0%-84.2%
Forward P/E10.7x11.5x11.8x10.4x
Total Debt$1.30B$1.12B$303M$641M
Cash & Equiv.$271M$668M$1.33B$380M

FULT vs TRMK vs WSFS vs SFNCLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

FULT
TRMK
WSFS
SFNC
StockMay 20May 26Return
Fulton Financial Co… (FULT)100192.5+92.5%
Trustmark Corporati… (TRMK)100188.1+88.1%
WSFS Financial Corp… (WSFS)100259.7+159.7%
Simmons First Natio… (SFNC)100124.9+24.9%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: FULT vs TRMK vs WSFS vs SFNC

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: FULT and WSFS are tied at the top with 2 categories each — the right choice depends on your priorities. WSFS Financial Corporation is the stronger pick specifically for capital preservation and lower volatility and recent price momentum and sentiment. SFNC and TRMK also each lead in at least one category. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
FULT
Fulton Financial Corporation
The Banking Pick

FULT has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.

  • Rev growth 5.0%, EPS growth 32.5%
  • Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs SFNC's 0.9% (lower = leaner)
  • Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs SFNC's 0.9%
Best for: growth exposure
TRMK
Trustmark Corporation
The Banking Pick

TRMK is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.

  • NIM 3.4% vs SFNC's 2.9%
  • 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs SFNC's -56.7%
Best for: bank quality
WSFS
WSFS Financial Corporation
The Banking Pick

WSFS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.

  • 129.8% 10Y total return vs TRMK's 127.7%
  • Lower volatility, beta 0.89, Low D/E 11.1%, current ratio 0.08x
  • PEG 0.67 vs TRMK's 1.42
  • Beta 0.89 vs FULT's 1.13, lower leverage
Best for: long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night
SFNC
Simmons First National Corporation
The Banking Pick

SFNC is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.

  • Dividend streak 6 yrs, beta 1.02, yield 4.0%
  • Beta 1.02, yield 4.0%, current ratio 0.86x
  • Lower P/E (10.4x vs 11.5x)
  • 4.0% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs WSFS's 1.0%
Best for: income & stability and defensive
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthTRMK logoTRMK34.8% NII/revenue growth vs SFNC's -56.7%
ValueSFNC logoSFNCLower P/E (10.4x vs 11.5x)
Quality / MarginsFULT logoFULTEfficiency ratio 0.4% vs SFNC's 0.9% (lower = leaner)
Stability / SafetyWSFS logoWSFSBeta 0.89 vs FULT's 1.13, lower leverage
DividendsSFNC logoSFNC4.0% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs WSFS's 1.0%
Momentum (1Y)WSFS logoWSFS+36.7% vs SFNC's +15.7%
Efficiency (ROA)FULT logoFULTEfficiency ratio 0.4% vs SFNC's 0.9%

FULT vs TRMK vs WSFS vs SFNC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

FULTFulton Financial Corporation
FY 2024
Financial Service, Other
32.8%$85M
Fiduciary and Trust
32.7%$85M
Deposit Account
21.4%$56M
Service, Other
7.7%$20M
Mortgage Banking
5.4%$14M
TRMKTrustmark Corporation

Segment breakdown not available.

WSFSWSFS Financial Corporation
FY 2025
Service, Other
50.0%$58M
Managed Service Fees
17.0%$20M
Miscellaneous Products And Services
16.5%$19M
Capital Market Revenue
8.5%$10M
Currency Preparation
5.8%$7M
ATM Insurance
2.2%$3M
SFNCSimmons First National Corporation
FY 2025
Deposit Account
36.8%$51M
Fiduciary and Trust
28.5%$39M
Credit and Debit Card
24.7%$34M
Mortgage Loans
5.9%$8M
Financial Service, Other
4.1%$6M

FULT vs TRMK vs WSFS vs SFNC — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLWSFSLAGGINGTRMK

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

WSFS leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.

FULT is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.9B annually — 3.0x SFNC's $627M. WSFS is the more profitable business, keeping 21.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SFNC's -63.4%.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…SFNC logoSFNCSimmons First Nat…
RevenueTrailing 12 months$1.9B$1.1B$1.4B$627M
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$529M$323M$408M-$497M
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$392M$224M$287M-$398M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$267M$230M$214M$755M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+67.4%+71.0%+74.7%+5.8%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+25.7%+25.5%+28.0%-84.2%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+20.7%+20.0%+21.1%-63.4%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+15.0%+20.7%+15.7%+71.7%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+47.2%+5.4%+22.9%+42.1%
WSFS leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

SFNC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 10.4x trailing earnings, FULT trades at a 27% valuation discount to WSFS's 14.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FULT offers better value at 0.74x vs TRMK's 1.50x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…SFNC logoSFNCSimmons First Nat…
Market CapShares × price$4.2B$2.6B$3.8B$3.1B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$5.2B$3.1B$2.8B$3.4B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS10.38x12.10x14.12x-7.26x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.10.67x11.46x11.76x10.38x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate0.74x1.50x0.81x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple9.78x9.47x6.78x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue2.20x2.35x2.79x4.95x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share1.13x1.28x1.44x0.84x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF14.61x11.36x17.74x6.90x
SFNC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

WSFS leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.

FULT delivers a 11.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $-12 for SFNC. WSFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TRMK's 0.53x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TRMK scores 7/9 vs SFNC's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…SFNC logoSFNCSimmons First Nat…
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+11.6%+10.8%+10.6%-11.6%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+1.2%+1.2%+1.4%-1.6%
ROICReturn on invested capital+7.5%+7.1%+9.5%-9.1%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+9.5%+3.2%+10.3%-4.2%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–96764
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage0.37x0.53x0.11x0.19x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$1.0B$448M-$1.0B$261M
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$271M$668M$1.3B$380M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$1.3B$1.1B$303M$641M
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense0.84x0.75x1.30x-1.01x
WSFS leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

WSFS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in TRMK five years ago would be worth $14,841 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,601 for SFNC. Over the past 12 months, WSFS leads with a +36.7% total return vs SFNC's +15.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WSFS at 31.5% vs SFNC's 14.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…SFNC logoSFNCSimmons First Nat…
YTD ReturnYear-to-date+11.8%+15.1%+30.8%+15.0%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+29.1%+31.7%+36.7%+15.7%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+126.2%+110.9%+127.3%+49.4%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+44.6%+48.4%+45.2%-14.0%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+107.4%+127.7%+129.8%+26.3%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+31.3%+28.2%+31.5%+14.3%
WSFS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

WSFS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

WSFS is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 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. WSFS currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs FULT's 93.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…SFNC logoSFNCSimmons First Nat…
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5001.13x0.94x0.89x1.02x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$22.99$45.99$73.06$22.18
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$16.60$33.39$49.92$17.00
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+93.9%+97.3%+98.3%+96.6%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10048.151.860.456.2
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded2.0M396K386K1.2M
WSFS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

SFNC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: FULT as "Hold", TRMK as "Hold", WSFS as "Hold", SFNC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 11.2% upside for FULT (target: $24) vs 1.7% for TRMK (target: $46). For income investors, SFNC offers the higher dividend yield at 3.99% vs WSFS's 0.95%.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…SFNC logoSFNCSimmons First Nat…
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellHoldHoldHoldBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$24.00$45.50$74.67$22.67
# AnalystsCovering analysts209139
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+3.6%+2.2%+1.0%+4.0%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises2116
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$0.77$0.97$0.68$0.85
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap+1.6%+3.0%+7.7%0.0%
SFNC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

WSFS leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). SFNC leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook).

Best OverallWSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS)Leads 4 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

FULT vs TRMK vs WSFS vs SFNC: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is FULT or TRMK or WSFS or SFNC a better buy right now?

For growth investors, Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is the stronger pick with 34.

8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -56. 7% for Simmons First National Corporation (SFNC). Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) offers the better valuation at 10. 4x trailing P/E (10. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Simmons First National Corporation (SFNC) a "Buy" — based on 9 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — FULT or TRMK or WSFS or SFNC?

On trailing P/E, Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) is the cheapest at 10.

4x versus WSFS Financial Corporation at 14. 1x. On forward P/E, Simmons First National Corporation is actually cheaper at 10. 4x — 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: WSFS Financial Corporation wins at 0. 67x versus Trustmark Corporation's 1. 42x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — FULT or TRMK or WSFS or SFNC?

Over the past 5 years, Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) delivered a total return of +48.

4%, compared to -14. 0% for Simmons First National Corporation (SFNC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WSFS returned +129. 8% versus SFNC's +26. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — FULT or TRMK or WSFS or SFNC?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

89β versus Fulton Financial Corporation's 1. 13β — meaning FULT is approximately 27% more volatile than WSFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 53% for Trustmark Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — FULT or TRMK or WSFS or SFNC?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is pulling ahead at 34.

8% versus -56. 7% for Simmons First National Corporation (SFNC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fulton Financial Corporation grew EPS 32. 5% year-over-year, compared to -343. 8% for Simmons First National 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — FULT or TRMK or WSFS or SFNC?

WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the more profitable company, earning 21.

1% net margin versus -63. 4% for Simmons First National Corporation — 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 -84. 2% for SFNC. 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.

07

Is FULT or TRMK or WSFS or SFNC 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 Trustmark Corporation's 1. 42x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Simmons First National Corporation (SFNC) trades at 10. 4x forward P/E versus 11. 8x for WSFS Financial Corporation — 1. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FULT: 11. 2% to $24. 00.

08

Which pays a better dividend — FULT or TRMK or WSFS or SFNC?

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Simmons First National Corporation (SFNC) offers the highest yield at 4. 0%, versus 1. 0% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS).

09

Is FULT or TRMK or WSFS or SFNC better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

89), 1. 0% yield, +129. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WSFS: +129. 8%, FULT: +107. 4%), 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.

10

What are the main differences between FULT and TRMK and WSFS and SFNC?

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: FULT is a small-cap deep-value stock; TRMK is a small-cap high-growth stock; WSFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; SFNC is a small-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.

Stocks Like

FULT

Dividend Mega-Cap Quality

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 12%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

TRMK

High-Growth Quality Leader

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 17%
  • Net Margin > 12%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

WSFS

Quality Mega-Cap Compounder

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 12%
  • Dividend Yield > 0.5%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

SFNC

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Dividend Yield > 1.5%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform FULT and TRMK and WSFS and SFNC on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(FULT: 5.0% · TRMK: 34.8%)
Net Margin>
%
(FULT: 20.7% · TRMK: 20.0%)
P/E Ratio<
x
(FULT: 10.4x · TRMK: 12.1x)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.