Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
GLBZ vs FUNC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
GLBZ vs FUNC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $14M | $248M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $16M | $112M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $26K | $25M |
| Gross Margin | 67.4% | 68.8% |
| Operating Margin | -4.0% | 24.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 8.7x |
| Total Debt | $30M | $188M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $24M | $78M |
GLBZ vs FUNC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Glen Burnie Bancorp (GLBZ) | 100 | 58.7 | -41.3% |
| First United Corpor… (FUNC) | 100 | 277.5 | +177.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GLBZ vs FUNC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
GLBZ is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta -0.42, yield 6.1%
- Lower volatility, beta -0.42, current ratio 0.30x
- Beta -0.42, yield 6.1%, current ratio 0.30x
FUNC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 16.9%, EPS growth 40.0%
- 289.2% 10Y total return vs GLBZ's -20.9%
- 16.9% NII/revenue growth vs GLBZ's 13.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.9% NII/revenue growth vs GLBZ's 13.7% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs GLBZ's 0.7% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Lower D/E ratio (104.7% vs 168.4%) | |
| Dividends | 6.1% yield, vs FUNC's 2.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +27.8% vs GLBZ's +18.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs GLBZ's 0.7% |
GLBZ vs FUNC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
GLBZ vs FUNC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FUNC leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FUNC is the larger business by revenue, generating $112M annually — 7.0x GLBZ's $16M. FUNC is the more profitable business, keeping 18.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GLBZ's -0.7%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $16M | $112M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $10,000 | $36M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $26,000 | $25M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2M | $16M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.4% | +68.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -4.0% | +24.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -0.7% | +18.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -0.3% | +18.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.8% | +20.2% |
Valuation Metrics
GLBZ leads this category, winning 3 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $14M | $248M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $20M | $357M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -125.61x | 12.12x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 8.68x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.08x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 11.52x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.88x | 2.22x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.79x | 1.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 12.18x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FUNC leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FUNC delivers a 12.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $0 for GLBZ. FUNC carries lower financial leverage with a 1.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GLBZ's 1.68x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FUNC scores 6/9 vs GLBZ's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.1% | +12.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.0% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -1.0% | +5.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.1% | +8.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.68x | 1.05x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $6M | $109M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $24M | $78M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $30M | $188M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.06x | 1.01x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FUNC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FUNC five years ago would be worth $23,452 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $5,088 for GLBZ. Over the past 12 months, FUNC leads with a +27.8% total return vs GLBZ's +18.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FUNC at 47.1% vs GLBZ's -12.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +8.7% | +4.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +18.6% | +27.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -32.7% | +218.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -49.1% | +134.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -20.9% | +289.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -12.3% | +47.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — GLBZ and FUNC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GLBZ is the less volatile stock with a -0.42 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FUNC's 0.72 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FUNC currently trades 91.0% from its 52-week high vs GLBZ's 82.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.42x | 0.72x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.88 | $41.95 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.71 | $28.00 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.7% | +91.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.2 | 50.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1K | 11K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — GLBZ and FUNC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
For income investors, GLBZ offers the higher dividend yield at 6.15% vs FUNC's 2.15%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $25.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 1 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +6.1% | +2.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 7 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.30 | $0.82 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.6% |
FUNC leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). GLBZ leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
GLBZ vs FUNC: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GLBZ or FUNC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, First United Corporation (FUNC) is the stronger pick with 16.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 13. 7% for Glen Burnie Bancorp (GLBZ). First United Corporation (FUNC) offers the better valuation at 12. 1x trailing P/E (8. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate First United Corporation (FUNC) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 is the better long-term investment — GLBZ or FUNC?
Over the past 5 years, First United Corporation (FUNC) delivered a total return of +134.
5%, compared to -49. 1% for Glen Burnie Bancorp (GLBZ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FUNC returned +289. 2% versus GLBZ's -20. 9%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — GLBZ or FUNC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Glen Burnie Bancorp (GLBZ) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
42β versus First United Corporation's 0. 72β — meaning FUNC is approximately -271% more volatile than GLBZ relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, First United Corporation (FUNC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 105% versus 168% for Glen Burnie Bancorp — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — GLBZ or FUNC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), First United Corporation (FUNC) is pulling ahead at 16.
9% versus 13. 7% for Glen Burnie Bancorp (GLBZ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: First United Corporation grew EPS 40. 0% year-over-year, compared to -107. 7% for Glen Burnie 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.
05Which has better profit margins — GLBZ or FUNC?
First United Corporation (FUNC) is the more profitable company, earning 18.
4% net margin versus -0. 7% for Glen Burnie Bancorp — meaning it keeps 18. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FUNC leads at 24. 4% versus -4. 0% for GLBZ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FUNC leads at 68. 8%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — GLBZ or FUNC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Glen Burnie Bancorp (GLBZ) offers the highest yield at 6. 1%, versus 2. 2% for First United Corporation (FUNC).
07Is GLBZ or FUNC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Glen Burnie Bancorp (GLBZ) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
42), 6. 1% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GLBZ: -20. 9%, FUNC: +289. 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.
08What are the main differences between GLBZ and FUNC?
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: GLBZ is a small-cap income-oriented stock; FUNC 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.