Compare Stocks

5 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP vs UMBF

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%
UMBF
UMB Financial Corporation

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$9.98B
5Y Perf.+155.6%

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP vs UMBF — Key Financials

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

Company Snapshot
FULT logoFULT
WSFS logoWSFS
TRMK logoTRMK
IBCP logoIBCP
UMBF logoUMBF
IndustryBanks - RegionalBanks - RegionalBanks - RegionalBanks - RegionalBanks - Regional
Market Cap$4.15B$3.79B$2.64B$690M$9.98B
Revenue (TTM)$1.89B$1.36B$1.12B$315M$4.44B
Net Income (TTM)$392M$287M$224M$69M$883M
Gross Margin67.4%74.7%71.0%69.6%54.4%
Operating Margin25.7%28.0%25.5%25.8%20.3%
Forward P/E10.7x11.8x11.5x9.4x10.3x
Total Debt$1.30B$303M$1.12B$117M$3.80B
Cash & Equiv.$271M$1.33B$668M$52M$953M

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP vs UMBFLong-Term Stock Performance

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

FULT
WSFS
TRMK
IBCP
UMBF
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%
UMB Financial Corpo… (UMBF)100255.6+155.6%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP vs UMBF

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

Bottom line: UMBF leads in 3 of 7 categories (5-stock set), making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and profitability and margin quality. Independent Bank Corporation is the stronger pick specifically for valuation and capital efficiency and capital preservation and lower volatility. FULT and WSFS 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 ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.

  • Rev growth 5.0%, EPS growth 32.5%
  • 3.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs UMBF's 1.4%
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 Financial Play

Among these 5 stocks, TRMK doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.

Best for: financial services exposure
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
UMBF
UMB Financial Corporation
The Banking Pick

UMBF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for bank quality.

  • NIM 3.5% vs FULT's 3.2%
  • 68.5% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1%
  • Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs WSFS's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
  • Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs WSFS's 0.5%
Best for: bank quality
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthUMBF logoUMBF68.5% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1%
ValueIBCP logoIBCPLower P/E (9.4x vs 10.3x)
Quality / MarginsUMBF logoUMBFEfficiency ratio 0.3% vs WSFS's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
Stability / SafetyIBCP logoIBCPBeta 0.83 vs UMBF's 1.19, lower leverage
DividendsFULT logoFULT3.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs UMBF's 1.4%
Momentum (1Y)WSFS logoWSFS+36.7% vs IBCP's +11.2%
Efficiency (ROA)UMBF logoUMBFEfficiency ratio 0.3% vs WSFS's 0.5%

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP vs UMBF — 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
UMBFUMB Financial Corporation
FY 2025
Other Financial Services
94.0%$69M
Investment Securities Gains Losses Net
42.2%$31M
Trading And Investment Banking
33.5%$25M
Deposit Account
0.2%$134,000
Credit Card
-69.9%$-51,301,000

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP vs UMBF — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLIBCPLAGGINGUMBF

Who Leads Where

IBCP leads in 1 of 6 categories

FULT leads 0 • WSFS leads 0 • TRMK leads 0 • UMBF leads 0 • 5 tied

Explore the data ↓
UMBFUMB Financial Corpora…
0leads
TRMKTrustmark Corporation
0leads
WSFSWSFS Financial Corpor…
0leads
FULTFulton Financial Corp…
0leads
IBCPIndependent Bank Corp…
1leads
6 Total Categories

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

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

UMBF is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.4B annually — 14.1x IBCP's $315M. IBCP is the more profitable business, keeping 21.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UMBF's 15.8%.

MetricFULT logoFULTFulton Financial …WSFS logoWSFSWSFS Financial Co…TRMK logoTRMKTrustmark Corpora…IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …UMBF logoUMBFUMB Financial Cor…
RevenueTrailing 12 months$1.9B$1.4B$1.1B$315M$4.4B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$529M$408M$323M$89M$1.1B
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$392M$287M$224M$69M$883M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$267M$214M$230M$70M$985M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+67.4%+74.7%+71.0%+69.6%+54.4%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+25.7%+28.0%+25.5%+25.8%+20.3%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+20.7%+21.1%+20.0%+21.7%+15.8%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+15.0%+15.7%+20.7%+22.2%+22.0%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+47.2%+22.9%+5.4%+2.3%+176.9%
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 29% valuation discount to UMBF's 14.4x 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 …UMBF logoUMBFUMB Financial Cor…
Market CapShares × price$4.2B$3.8B$2.6B$690M$10.0B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$5.2B$2.8B$3.1B$755M$12.8B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS10.38x14.12x12.10x10.25x14.35x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.10.67x11.76x11.46x9.44x10.30x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate0.74x0.81x1.50x1.95x1.59x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple9.78x6.78x9.47x9.28x12.10x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue2.20x2.79x2.35x2.19x2.25x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share1.13x1.44x1.28x1.39x1.30x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF14.61x17.74x11.36x9.83x10.20x
IBCP leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

Evenly matched — WSFS and IBCP each lead in 4 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 …UMBF logoUMBFUMB Financial Cor…
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+11.6%+10.6%+10.8%+14.2%+11.7%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+1.2%+1.4%+1.2%+1.3%+1.2%
ROICReturn on invested capital+7.5%+9.5%+7.1%+10.2%+7.5%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+9.5%+10.3%+3.2%+2.6%+14.4%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–966787
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage0.37x0.11x0.53x0.23x0.49x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$1.0B-$1.0B$448M$65M$2.8B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$271M$1.3B$668M$52M$953M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$1.3B$303M$1.1B$117M$3.8B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense0.84x1.30x0.75x0.91x0.63x
Evenly matched — WSFS and IBCP each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

Evenly matched — WSFS and IBCP and UMBF each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in IBCP five years ago would be worth $16,340 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,264 for UMBF. 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 UMBF at 32.9% 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 …UMBF logoUMBFUMB Financial Cor…
YTD ReturnYear-to-date+11.8%+30.8%+15.1%+5.9%+12.9%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+29.1%+36.7%+31.7%+11.2%+31.4%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+126.2%+127.3%+110.9%+123.9%+134.7%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+44.6%+45.2%+48.4%+63.4%+42.6%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+107.4%+129.8%+127.7%+181.9%+168.6%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+31.3%+31.5%+28.2%+30.8%+32.9%
Evenly matched — WSFS and IBCP and UMBF each lead in 2 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 UMBF's 1.19 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 …UMBF logoUMBFUMB Financial Cor…
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5001.13x0.89x0.94x0.83x1.19x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$22.99$73.06$45.99$37.39$136.11
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$16.60$49.92$33.39$29.63$98.16
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+93.9%+98.3%+97.3%+89.6%+96.3%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10048.160.451.843.072.4
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded2.0M386K396K177K606K
Evenly matched — WSFS and IBCP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

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

Analyst consensus: FULT as "Hold", WSFS as "Hold", TRMK as "Hold", IBCP as "Hold", UMBF as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 14.8% upside for UMBF (target: $150) 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 …UMBF logoUMBFUMB Financial Cor…
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellHoldHoldHoldHoldBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$24.00$74.67$45.50$38.00$150.40
# AnalystsCovering analysts20139718
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+3.6%+1.0%+2.2%+3.1%+1.4%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises2111117
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$0.77$0.68$0.97$1.03$1.77
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap+1.6%+7.7%+3.0%+1.8%+1.3%
Evenly matched — FULT and UMBF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

IBCP leads in 1 of 6 categories — strongest in Valuation Metrics. 5 categories are tied.

Best OverallIndependent Bank Corporation (IBCP)Leads 1 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

FULT vs WSFS vs TRMK vs IBCP vs UMBF: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

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

For growth investors, UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) is the stronger pick with 68.

5% 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 UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) a "Buy" — 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — FULT or WSFS or TRMK or IBCP or UMBF?

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

3x versus UMB Financial Corporation at 14. 4x. 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 or UMBF?

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

4%, compared to +42. 6% for UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF). 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 or UMBF?

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

83β versus UMB Financial Corporation's 1. 19β — meaning UMBF is approximately 44% 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 or UMBF?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) is pulling ahead at 68.

5% 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. 6% for UMB 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — FULT or WSFS or TRMK or IBCP or UMBF?

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

7% net margin versus 15. 8% for UMB Financial 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 20. 3% for UMBF. 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 or UMBF 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 UMBF: 14. 8% to $150. 40.

08

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

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 or UMBF 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%, UMBF: +168. 6%), 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 and UMBF?

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; UMBF 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.

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
Stocks Like

UMBF

High-Growth Compounder

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 34%
  • Net Margin > 9%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform FULT and WSFS and TRMK and IBCP and UMBF 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.