Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
HTBK vs CVBF vs WAFD vs BANR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
HTBK vs CVBF vs WAFD vs BANR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $828M | $2.78B | $2.73B | $2.22B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $266M | $643M | $1.41B | $819M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $48M | $209M | $243M | $195M |
| Gross Margin | 72.6% | 79.9% | 50.9% | 79.0% |
| Operating Margin | 25.4% | 43.8% | 20.5% | 29.5% |
| Forward P/E | 13.3x | 14.2x | 10.9x | 10.5x |
| Total Debt | $40M | $991M | $1.82B | $373M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $22M | $108M | $657M | $183M |
HTBK vs CVBF vs WAFD vs BANR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | Apr 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Heritage Commerce C… (HTBK) | 100 | 165.4 | +65.4% |
| CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) | 100 | 99.4 | -0.6% |
| WaFd, Inc. (WAFD) | 100 | 121.4 | +21.4% |
| Banner Corporation (BANR) | 100 | 161.6 | +61.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HTBK vs CVBF vs WAFD vs BANR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HTBK has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 5.8%, EPS growth 18.2%
- 5.8% NII/revenue growth vs CVBF's -2.3%
- +53.4% vs BANR's +9.1%
CVBF is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 4.0%
- 4.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs WAFD's 3.0%
WAFD is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BANR's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BANR's 0.5%
BANR is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 101.1% 10Y total return vs HTBK's 75.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.80, Low D/E 19.1%, current ratio 0.02x
- PEG 0.90 vs CVBF's 4.48
- Beta 0.80, yield 3.0%, current ratio 0.02x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.8% NII/revenue growth vs CVBF's -2.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.5x vs 14.2x), PEG 0.90 vs 4.48 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BANR's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.80 vs HTBK's 1.04 | |
| Dividends | 4.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs WAFD's 3.0% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +53.4% vs BANR's +9.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BANR's 0.5% |
HTBK vs CVBF vs WAFD vs BANR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
HTBK vs CVBF vs WAFD vs BANR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HTBK leads in 2 of 6 categories
CVBF leads 1 • BANR leads 1 • WAFD leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CVBF leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WAFD is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.4B annually — 5.3x HTBK's $266M. CVBF is the more profitable business, keeping 32.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to WAFD's 16.0%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $266M | $643M | $1.4B | $819M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $71M | $294M | $277M | $253M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $48M | $209M | $243M | $195M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $61M | $217M | $226M | $248M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +72.6% | +79.9% | +50.9% | +79.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +25.4% | +43.8% | +20.5% | +29.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +18.0% | +32.5% | +16.0% | +23.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +22.8% | +33.8% | +14.8% | +30.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +47.1% | +11.1% | +46.3% | +11.2% |
Valuation Metrics
BANR leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.6x trailing earnings, BANR trades at a 33% valuation discount to HTBK's 17.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BANR offers better value at 1.00x vs WAFD's 4.41x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $828M | $2.8B | $2.7B | $2.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $847M | $3.7B | $3.9B | $2.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 17.24x | 13.49x | 13.56x | 11.63x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.32x | 14.24x | 10.93x | 10.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.00x | 4.25x | 4.41x | 1.00x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.89x | 13.02x | 12.98x | 9.55x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.11x | 4.33x | 1.93x | 2.71x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.17x | 1.21x | 0.94x | 1.16x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 13.63x | 12.81x | 13.09x | 8.96x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HTBK leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BANR delivers a 10.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $10 in annual profit, vs $7 for HTBK. HTBK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.06x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WAFD's 0.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HTBK scores 8/9 vs CVBF's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.8% | +9.3% | +8.0% | +10.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.9% | +1.4% | +1.0% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.9% | +6.8% | +3.9% | +7.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.1% | +9.3% | +5.7% | +10.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.06x | 0.43x | 0.60x | 0.19x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $18M | $883M | $1.2B | $190M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $22M | $108M | $657M | $183M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $40M | $991M | $1.8B | $373M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.95x | 2.12x | 0.48x | 1.11x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HTBK leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HTBK five years ago would be worth $13,069 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,217 for CVBF. Over the past 12 months, HTBK leads with a +53.4% total return vs BANR's +9.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HTBK at 29.3% vs WAFD's 14.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +13.7% | +10.9% | +11.9% | +6.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +53.4% | +13.1% | +28.5% | +9.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +116.3% | +94.0% | +51.6% | +60.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +30.7% | +12.2% | +22.5% | +29.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +75.1% | +67.6% | +84.4% | +101.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +29.3% | +24.7% | +14.9% | +17.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — WAFD and BANR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BANR is the less volatile stock with a 0.80 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HTBK's 1.04 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WAFD currently trades 98.8% from its 52-week high vs BANR's 93.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.04x | 0.94x | 0.81x | 0.80x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $13.83 | $21.48 | $36.12 | $69.83 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $8.92 | $17.95 | $26.31 | $57.05 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.3% | +95.5% | +98.8% | +93.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.5 | 57.9 | 68.3 | 58.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 737K | 1.6M | 661K | 292K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CVBF and WAFD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HTBK as "Hold", CVBF as "Hold", WAFD as "Hold", BANR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 20.7% upside for CVBF (target: $25) vs -1.9% for WAFD (target: $35). For income investors, CVBF offers the higher dividend yield at 3.98% vs WAFD's 2.96%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $14.50 | $24.75 | $35.00 | $70.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 16 | 11 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.8% | +4.0% | +3.0% | +3.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 4 | 7 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.52 | $0.82 | $1.05 | $1.96 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.5% | +2.9% | +3.7% | +1.6% |
HTBK leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). CVBF leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
HTBK vs CVBF vs WAFD vs BANR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HTBK or CVBF or WAFD or BANR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Heritage Commerce Corp (HTBK) is the stronger pick with 5.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 3% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). Banner Corporation (BANR) offers the better valuation at 11. 6x trailing P/E (10. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Heritage Commerce Corp (HTBK) a "Hold" — based on 12 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 — HTBK or CVBF or WAFD or BANR?
On trailing P/E, Banner Corporation (BANR) is the cheapest at 11.
6x versus Heritage Commerce Corp at 17. 2x. On forward P/E, Banner Corporation is actually cheaper at 10. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Banner Corporation wins at 0. 90x versus CVB Financial Corp. 's 4. 48x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HTBK or CVBF or WAFD or BANR?
Over the past 5 years, Heritage Commerce Corp (HTBK) delivered a total return of +30.
7%, compared to +12. 2% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BANR returned +101. 1% versus CVBF's +67. 6%. 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 — HTBK or CVBF or WAFD or BANR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Banner Corporation (BANR) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
80β versus Heritage Commerce Corp's 1. 04β — meaning HTBK is approximately 30% more volatile than BANR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Heritage Commerce Corp (HTBK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 60% for WaFd, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HTBK or CVBF or WAFD or BANR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Heritage Commerce Corp (HTBK) is pulling ahead at 5.
8% versus -2. 3% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Heritage Commerce Corp grew EPS 18. 2% year-over-year, compared to 5. 2% for WaFd, 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 — HTBK or CVBF or WAFD or BANR?
CVB Financial Corp.
(CVBF) is the more profitable company, earning 32. 5% net margin versus 16. 0% for WaFd, Inc. — meaning it keeps 32. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CVBF leads at 43. 8% versus 20. 5% for WAFD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CVBF leads at 79. 9%, 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 HTBK or CVBF or WAFD or BANR 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, Banner Corporation (BANR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 90x versus CVB Financial Corp. 's 4. 48x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Banner Corporation (BANR) trades at 10. 5x forward P/E versus 14. 2x for CVB Financial Corp. — 3. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CVBF: 20. 7% to $24. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — HTBK or CVBF or WAFD or BANR?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) offers the highest yield at 4. 0%, versus 3. 0% for WaFd, Inc. (WAFD).
09Is HTBK or CVBF or WAFD or BANR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Banner Corporation (BANR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
80), 3. 0% yield, +101. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (BANR: +101. 1%, HTBK: +75. 1%), 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 HTBK and CVBF and WAFD and BANR?
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.
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.