Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HIFS vs TRST vs NBTB vs NFBK vs ICE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
HIFS vs TRST vs NBTB vs NFBK vs ICE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges |
| Market Cap | $619M | $869M | $2.38B | $587M | $88.26B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $217M | $278M | $867M | $251M | $12.64B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $45M | $61M | $169M | $39M | $3.30B |
| Gross Margin | 30.1% | 67.1% | 72.1% | 49.1% | 61.9% |
| Operating Margin | 16.8% | 29.2% | 25.3% | 16.1% | 38.7% |
| Forward P/E | 20.2x | 17.1x | 10.9x | 10.4x | 19.3x |
| Total Debt | $1.50B | $193M | $327M | $760M | $20.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $352M | $51M | $185M | $168M | $837M |
HIFS vs TRST vs NBTB vs NFBK vs ICE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hingham Institution… (HIFS) | 100 | 172.8 | +72.8% |
| TrustCo Bank Corp NY (TRST) | 100 | 155.7 | +55.7% |
| NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) | 100 | 145.6 | +45.6% |
| Northfield Bancorp,… (NFBK) | 100 | 128.5 | +28.5% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 160.2 | +60.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HIFS vs TRST vs NBTB vs NFBK vs ICE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HIFS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 14.1%, EPS growth 6.8%
- 14.1% NII/revenue growth vs TRST's 5.8%
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs NBTB's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs NBTB's 0.5%
TRST is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +60.1% vs ICE's -10.6%
NBTB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency and defensive.
- PEG 1.55 vs TRST's 4.72
- Beta 0.88, yield 3.1%, current ratio 1.60x
- NIM 3.1% vs HIFS's 1.0%
- Lower P/E (10.9x vs 19.3x), PEG 1.55 vs 2.18
NFBK is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 3.7% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.2%
ICE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.30, yield 1.2%
- 224.7% 10Y total return vs TRST's 99.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.30, Low D/E 69.9%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.30 vs HIFS's 1.25, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.1% NII/revenue growth vs TRST's 5.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.9x vs 19.3x), PEG 1.55 vs 2.18 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs NBTB's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.30 vs HIFS's 1.25, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.7% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +60.1% vs ICE's -10.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs NBTB's 0.5% |
HIFS vs TRST vs NBTB vs NFBK vs ICE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
HIFS vs TRST vs NBTB vs NFBK vs ICE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ICE leads in 2 of 6 categories
NBTB leads 1 • TRST leads 1 • HIFS leads 0 • NFBK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.6B annually — 58.1x HIFS's $217M. ICE is the more profitable business, keeping 26.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NFBK's 11.9%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $217M | $278M | $867M | $251M | $12.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $62M | $90M | $241M | $61M | $6.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $45M | $61M | $169M | $39M | $3.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $30M | $46M | $225M | $42M | $4.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +30.1% | +67.1% | +72.1% | +49.1% | +61.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +16.8% | +29.2% | +25.3% | +16.1% | +38.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +13.0% | +22.0% | +19.5% | +11.9% | +26.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.4% | +16.4% | +25.2% | +11.9% | +33.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +195.1% | +44.1% | +39.5% | +68.8% | +23.1% |
Valuation Metrics
NBTB leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.7x trailing earnings, NBTB trades at a 49% valuation discount to ICE's 27.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NBTB offers better value at 1.95x vs TRST's 4.16x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $619M | $869M | $2.4B | $587M | $88.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.8B | $1.0B | $2.5B | $1.2B | $107.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 22.07x | 15.10x | 13.69x | 19.50x | 27.01x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.19x | 17.09x | 10.94x | 10.40x | 19.34x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.16x | 1.95x | — | 3.04x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 47.34x | 11.27x | 10.46x | 24.17x | 16.68x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.85x | 3.12x | 2.74x | 2.34x | 6.98x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.44x | 1.31x | 1.22x | 0.83x | 3.07x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 52.65x | 19.00x | 10.87x | 19.60x | 20.58x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ICE leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ICE delivers a 11.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $5 for NFBK. NBTB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HIFS's 3.47x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs HIFS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.8% | +8.9% | +9.5% | +5.5% | +11.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.0% | +1.0% | +1.1% | +0.7% | +2.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.4% | +7.2% | +7.9% | +2.0% | +7.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.2% | +2.8% | +2.4% | +2.5% | +9.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.47x | 0.28x | 0.17x | 1.08x | 0.70x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.1B | $142M | $142M | $592M | $19.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $352M | $51M | $185M | $168M | $837M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.5B | $193M | $327M | $760M | $20.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.44x | 0.90x | 1.05x | 0.46x | 6.53x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TRST leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TRST five years ago would be worth $14,898 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,983 for HIFS. Over the past 12 months, TRST leads with a +60.1% total return vs ICE's -10.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TRST at 24.0% vs ICE's 14.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +5.1% | +19.8% | +10.5% | +26.2% | -2.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +10.6% | +60.1% | +8.6% | +28.3% | -10.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +60.1% | +90.4% | +55.7% | +65.4% | +50.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -0.2% | +49.0% | +33.5% | +1.1% | +43.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +139.9% | +99.2% | +104.0% | +20.5% | +224.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +17.0% | +24.0% | +15.9% | +18.3% | +14.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TRST and ICE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ICE is the less volatile stock with a 0.30 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HIFS's 1.25 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TRST currently trades 99.7% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 82.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.25x | 0.75x | 0.88x | 0.90x | 0.30x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $338.00 | $49.21 | $46.92 | $14.21 | $189.35 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $220.76 | $30.17 | $39.20 | $9.90 | $143.17 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +83.9% | +99.7% | +97.2% | +98.8% | +82.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.9 | 63.0 | 56.2 | 57.6 | 45.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 49K | 110K | 237K | 257K | 3.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NFBK and ICE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TRST as "Hold", NBTB as "Hold", NFBK as "Hold", ICE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 25.6% upside for ICE (target: $196) vs 0.9% for NBTB (target: $46). For income investors, NFBK offers the higher dividend yield at 3.73% vs HIFS's 0.88%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $46.00 | $14.50 | $195.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 3 | 10 | 9 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.9% | +3.1% | +3.1% | +3.7% | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 8 | 12 | 10 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.50 | $1.51 | $1.43 | $0.52 | $1.93 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +4.4% | +0.4% | +3.2% | +1.6% |
ICE leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NBTB leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
HIFS vs TRST vs NBTB vs NFBK vs ICE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HIFS or TRST or NBTB or NFBK or ICE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS) is the stronger pick with 14.
1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 8% for TrustCo Bank Corp NY (TRST). NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) offers the better valuation at 13. 7x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) a "Buy" — based on 36 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 — HIFS or TRST or NBTB or NFBK or ICE?
On trailing P/E, NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is the cheapest at 13. 7x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. at 27. 0x. On forward P/E, Northfield Bancorp, Inc. 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: NBT Bancorp Inc. wins at 1. 55x versus TrustCo Bank Corp NY's 4. 72x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HIFS or TRST or NBTB or NFBK or ICE?
Over the past 5 years, TrustCo Bank Corp NY (TRST) delivered a total return of +49.
0%, compared to -0. 2% for Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ICE returned +224. 7% versus NFBK's +20. 5%. 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 — HIFS or TRST or NBTB or NFBK or ICE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 30β versus Hingham Institution for Savings's 1. 25β — meaning HIFS is approximately 319% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 3% for Hingham Institution for Savings — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HIFS or TRST or NBTB or NFBK or ICE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS) is pulling ahead at 14.
1% versus 5. 8% for TrustCo Bank Corp NY (TRST). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: TrustCo Bank Corp NY grew EPS 26. 5% year-over-year, compared to -16. 3% for Northfield Bancorp, Inc.. 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 — HIFS or TRST or NBTB or NFBK or ICE?
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus 11. 9% for Northfield Bancorp, Inc. — meaning it keeps 26. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus 16. 1% for NFBK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NBTB leads at 72. 1%, 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 HIFS or TRST or NBTB or NFBK or ICE 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, NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 55x versus TrustCo Bank Corp NY's 4. 72x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Northfield Bancorp, Inc. (NFBK) trades at 10. 4x forward P/E versus 20. 2x for Hingham Institution for Savings — 9. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 25. 6% to $195. 71.
08Which pays a better dividend — HIFS or TRST or NBTB or NFBK or ICE?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Northfield Bancorp, Inc. (NFBK) offers the highest yield at 3. 7%, versus 0. 9% for Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS).
09Is HIFS or TRST or NBTB or NFBK or ICE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 30), 1. 2% yield, +224. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +224. 7%, HIFS: +139. 9%), 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 HIFS and TRST and NBTB and NFBK and ICE?
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: HIFS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TRST is a small-cap deep-value stock; NBTB is a small-cap deep-value stock; NFBK is a small-cap income-oriented stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder 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.