Compare Stocks

4 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP

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%
WSFS
WSFS Financial Corporation

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$3.79B
5Y Perf.+159.7%
TRMK
Trustmark Corporation

Banks - Regional

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

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$690M
5Y Perf.+142.5%

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP — Key Financials

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

Company Snapshot
FULT logoFULT
WSFS logoWSFS
TRMK logoTRMK
IBCP logoIBCP
IndustryBanks - RegionalBanks - RegionalBanks - RegionalBanks - Regional
Market Cap$4.15B$3.79B$2.64B$690M
Revenue (TTM)$1.89B$1.36B$1.12B$315M
Net Income (TTM)$392M$287M$224M$69M
Gross Margin67.4%74.7%71.0%69.6%
Operating Margin25.7%28.0%25.5%25.8%
Forward P/E10.7x11.8x11.5x9.4x
Total Debt$1.30B$303M$1.12B$117M
Cash & Equiv.$271M$1.33B$668M$52M

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCPLong-Term Stock Performance

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

FULT
WSFS
TRMK
IBCP
StockMay 20May 26Return
Fulton Financial Co… (FULT)100192.5+92.5%
WSFS Financial Corp… (WSFS)100259.7+159.7%
Trustmark Corporati… (TRMK)100188.1+88.1%
Independent Bank Co… (IBCP)100242.5+142.5%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP

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

Bottom line: FULT leads in 3 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for profitability and margin quality and dividend income and shareholder returns. Independent Bank Corporation is the stronger pick specifically for valuation and capital efficiency and capital preservation and lower volatility. WSFS 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 carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.

  • Rev growth 5.0%, EPS growth 32.5%
  • Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs WSFS's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
  • 3.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs IBCP's 3.1%
  • Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs WSFS's 0.5%
Best for: growth exposure
WSFS
WSFS Financial Corporation
The Banking Pick

WSFS is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.

  • PEG 0.67 vs IBCP's 1.79
  • +36.7% vs IBCP's +11.2%
Best for: valuation efficiency
TRMK
Trustmark Corporation
The Banking Pick

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

  • NIM 3.4% vs FULT's 3.2%
  • 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1%
Best for: bank quality
IBCP
Independent Bank Corporation
The Banking Pick

IBCP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.

  • Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 0.83, yield 3.1%
  • 181.9% 10Y total return vs WSFS's 129.8%
  • Lower volatility, beta 0.83, Low D/E 23.2%, current ratio 370.62x
  • Beta 0.83, yield 3.1%, current ratio 370.62x
Best for: income & stability and long-term compounding
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthTRMK logoTRMK34.8% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1%
ValueIBCP logoIBCPLower P/E (9.4x vs 11.5x)
Quality / MarginsFULT logoFULTEfficiency ratio 0.4% vs WSFS's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
Stability / SafetyIBCP logoIBCPBeta 0.83 vs FULT's 1.13, lower leverage
DividendsFULT logoFULT3.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs IBCP's 3.1%
Momentum (1Y)WSFS logoWSFS+36.7% vs IBCP's +11.2%
Efficiency (ROA)FULT logoFULTEfficiency ratio 0.4% vs WSFS's 0.5%

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP — 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
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
TRMKTrustmark Corporation

Segment breakdown not available.

IBCPIndependent Bank Corporation
FY 2021
Interchange Income
32.5%$14M
Service Charges on Deposits
23.5%$10M
Overdraft Fees
19.5%$8M
Investment and Insurance Commissions
6.0%$3M
Other Deposit Related Income
5.3%$2M
Asset Management Revenue
3.9%$2M
Account Service Charges
2.6%$1M
Other (3)
6.6%$3M

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP — 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)

Evenly matched — WSFS and IBCP each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.

FULT is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.9B annually — 6.0x IBCP's $315M. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 21.7% (IBCP) to 20.0% (TRMK).

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …
RevenueTrailing 12 months$1.9B$1.4B$1.1B$315M
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$529M$408M$323M$89M
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$392M$287M$224M$69M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$267M$214M$230M$70M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+67.4%+74.7%+71.0%+69.6%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+25.7%+28.0%+25.5%+25.8%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+20.7%+21.1%+20.0%+21.7%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+15.0%+15.7%+20.7%+22.2%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+47.2%+22.9%+5.4%+2.3%
Evenly matched — WSFS and IBCP each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

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

At 10.3x trailing earnings, IBCP 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 IBCP's 1.95x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …
Market CapShares × price$4.2B$3.8B$2.6B$690M
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$5.2B$2.8B$3.1B$755M
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS10.38x14.12x12.10x10.25x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.10.67x11.76x11.46x9.44x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate0.74x0.81x1.50x1.95x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple9.78x6.78x9.47x9.28x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue2.20x2.79x2.35x2.19x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share1.13x1.44x1.28x1.39x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF14.61x17.74x11.36x9.83x
IBCP leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

WSFS leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.

IBCP delivers a 14.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $11 for WSFS. 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), IBCP scores 8/9 vs WSFS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+11.6%+10.6%+10.8%+14.2%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+1.2%+1.4%+1.2%+1.3%
ROICReturn on invested capital+7.5%+9.5%+7.1%+10.2%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+9.5%+10.3%+3.2%+2.6%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–96678
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage0.37x0.11x0.53x0.23x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$1.0B-$1.0B$448M$65M
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$271M$1.3B$668M$52M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$1.3B$303M$1.1B$117M
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense0.84x1.30x0.75x0.91x
WSFS leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

WSFS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in IBCP five years ago would be worth $16,340 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,462 for FULT. Over the past 12 months, WSFS leads with a +36.7% total return vs IBCP's +11.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WSFS at 31.5% vs TRMK's 28.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …
YTD ReturnYear-to-date+11.8%+30.8%+15.1%+5.9%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+29.1%+36.7%+31.7%+11.2%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+126.2%+127.3%+110.9%+123.9%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+44.6%+45.2%+48.4%+63.4%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+107.4%+129.8%+127.7%+181.9%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+31.3%+31.5%+28.2%+30.8%
WSFS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — WSFS and IBCP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

IBCP is the less volatile stock with a 0.83 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 IBCP's 89.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5001.13x0.89x0.94x0.83x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$22.99$73.06$45.99$37.39
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$16.60$49.92$33.39$29.63
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+93.9%+98.3%+97.3%+89.6%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10048.160.451.843.0
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded2.0M386K396K177K
Evenly matched — WSFS and IBCP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Evenly matched — FULT and IBCP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: FULT as "Hold", WSFS as "Hold", TRMK as "Hold", IBCP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 13.4% upside for IBCP (target: $38) vs 1.7% for TRMK (target: $46). For income investors, FULT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.57% vs WSFS's 0.95%.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellHoldHoldHoldHold
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$24.00$74.67$45.50$38.00
# AnalystsCovering analysts201397
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+3.6%+1.0%+2.2%+3.1%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises21111
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$0.77$0.68$0.97$1.03
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap+1.6%+7.7%+3.0%+1.8%
Evenly matched — FULT and IBCP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

WSFS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). IBCP leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.

Best OverallWSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

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

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

8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) offers the better valuation at 10. 3x trailing P/E (9. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) a "Hold" — based on 20 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 WSFS or TRMK or IBCP?

On trailing P/E, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) is the cheapest at 10.

3x versus WSFS Financial Corporation at 14. 1x. On forward P/E, Independent Bank Corporation is actually cheaper at 9. 4x. 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 Independent Bank Corporation's 1. 79x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

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

Over the past 5 years, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) delivered a total return of +63.

4%, compared to +44. 6% for Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IBCP returned +181. 9% versus FULT's +107. 4%. 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 WSFS or TRMK or IBCP?

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

83β versus Fulton Financial Corporation's 1. 13β — meaning FULT is approximately 37% more volatile than IBCP 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 WSFS or TRMK or IBCP?

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

8% versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fulton Financial Corporation grew EPS 32. 5% year-over-year, compared to 1. 9% for Trustmark 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 WSFS or TRMK or IBCP?

Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) is the more profitable company, earning 21.

7% net margin versus 20. 0% for Trustmark Corporation — meaning it keeps 21. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WSFS leads at 28. 0% versus 25. 5% for TRMK. 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 WSFS or TRMK or IBCP 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 Independent Bank Corporation's 1. 79x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) trades at 9. 4x forward P/E versus 11. 8x for WSFS Financial Corporation — 2. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IBCP: 13. 4% to $38. 00.

08

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

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) offers the highest yield at 3. 6%, versus 1. 0% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS).

09

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

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

83), 3. 1% yield, +181. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (IBCP: +181. 9%, 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 WSFS and TRMK and IBCP?

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; WSFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; TRMK is a small-cap high-growth stock; IBCP 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.

Stocks Like

FULT

Dividend Mega-Cap Quality

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • 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

TRMK

High-Growth Quality Leader

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

IBCP

Dividend Mega-Cap Quality

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 13%
  • Dividend Yield > 1.2%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

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

Revenue Growth>
%
(FULT: 5.0% · WSFS: -3.1%)
Net Margin>
%
(FULT: 20.7% · WSFS: 21.1%)
P/E Ratio<
x
(FULT: 10.4x · WSFS: 14.1x)

You Might Also Compare

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