Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HTH vs BOKF vs WSFS vs CVBF vs BANR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
HTH vs BOKF vs WSFS vs CVBF vs BANR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $2.27B | $10.28B | $3.80B | $2.78B | $2.22B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.63B | $3.36B | $1.36B | $643M | $819M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $162M | $537M | $287M | $209M | $195M |
| Gross Margin | 78.4% | 57.1% | 74.7% | 79.9% | 79.0% |
| Operating Margin | 13.6% | 19.8% | 28.0% | 43.8% | 29.5% |
| Forward P/E | 16.1x | 13.0x | 11.8x | 14.2x | 10.5x |
| Total Debt | $927M | $4.45B | $303M | $991M | $373M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.23B | $1.43B | $1.33B | $108M | $183M |
HTH vs BOKF vs WSFS vs CVBF vs BANR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hilltop Holdings In… (HTH) | 100 | 204.7 | +104.7% |
| BOK Financial Corpo… (BOKF) | 100 | 262.0 | +162.0% |
| WSFS Financial Corp… (WSFS) | 100 | 260.4 | +160.4% |
| CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) | 100 | 105.1 | +5.1% |
| Banner Corporation (BANR) | 100 | 174.6 | +74.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HTH vs BOKF vs WSFS vs CVBF vs BANR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HTH ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 0.72, yield 1.9%
- Rev growth 5.5%, EPS growth 51.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.72, Low D/E 42.2%, current ratio 0.24x
- Beta 0.72, yield 1.9%, current ratio 0.24x
BOKF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 168.5% 10Y total return vs WSFS's 129.0%
- 10.4% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1%
- +44.8% vs BANR's +9.1%
WSFS is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.67 vs CVBF's 4.48
- Lower P/E (11.8x vs 14.2x), PEG 0.67 vs 4.48
CVBF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and dividends.
- Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs HTH's 0.6% (lower = leaner)
- 4.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs BOKF's 1.7%
- Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs HTH's 0.6%
BANR is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 3.6% vs BOKF's 2.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.4% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.8x vs 14.2x), PEG 0.67 vs 4.48 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs HTH's 0.6% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.72 vs BOKF's 1.03, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs BOKF's 1.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +44.8% vs BANR's +9.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs HTH's 0.6% |
HTH vs BOKF vs WSFS vs CVBF vs BANR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HTH vs BOKF vs WSFS vs CVBF vs BANR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CVBF leads in 1 of 6 categories
WSFS leads 1 • HTH leads 0 • BOKF leads 0 • BANR leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CVBF leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BOKF is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.4B annually — 5.2x CVBF's $643M. CVBF is the more profitable business, keeping 32.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to HTH's 10.2%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.6B | $3.4B | $1.4B | $643M | $819M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $172M | $797M | $408M | $294M | $253M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $162M | $537M | $287M | $209M | $195M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$140M | $1.5B | $214M | $217M | $248M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +78.4% | +57.1% | +74.7% | +79.9% | +79.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +13.6% | +19.8% | +28.0% | +43.8% | +29.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.2% | +15.6% | +21.1% | +32.5% | +23.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.9% | +42.6% | +15.7% | +33.8% | +30.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -1.5% | +1.8% | +22.9% | +11.1% | +11.2% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — HTH and WSFS and BANR each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.6x trailing earnings, BANR trades at a 29% valuation discount to BOKF's 16.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), WSFS offers better value at 0.81x vs BOKF's 5.51x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.3B | $10.3B | $3.8B | $2.8B | $2.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.0B | $13.3B | $2.8B | $3.7B | $2.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 14.49x | 16.39x | 14.16x | 13.49x | 11.63x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 16.07x | 13.05x | 11.79x | 14.24x | 10.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 5.51x | 0.81x | 4.25x | 1.00x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.91x | 17.23x | 6.80x | 13.02x | 9.55x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.40x | 3.06x | 2.79x | 4.33x | 2.71x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.09x | 1.53x | 1.44x | 1.21x | 1.16x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 7.19x | 17.79x | 12.81x | 8.96x |
Profitability & Efficiency
WSFS leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
WSFS delivers a 10.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $7 for HTH. WSFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BOKF's 0.80x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BANR scores 7/9 vs CVBF's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +7.4% | +8.9% | +10.6% | +9.3% | +10.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.0% | +1.1% | +1.4% | +1.4% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.0% | +4.1% | +9.5% | +6.8% | +7.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.2% | +5.5% | +10.3% | +9.3% | +10.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.42x | 0.80x | 0.11x | 0.43x | 0.19x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$305M | $3.0B | -$1.0B | $883M | $190M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.2B | $1.4B | $1.3B | $108M | $183M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $927M | $4.5B | $303M | $991M | $373M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.50x | 0.55x | 1.30x | 2.12x | 1.11x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — BOKF and WSFS each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BOKF five years ago would be worth $15,944 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,217 for CVBF. Over the past 12 months, BOKF leads with a +44.8% total return vs BANR's +9.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WSFS at 33.0% vs HTH's 9.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +13.4% | +13.0% | +31.2% | +10.9% | +6.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +30.0% | +44.8% | +37.7% | +13.1% | +9.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +30.8% | +79.4% | +135.3% | +94.0% | +60.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +15.4% | +59.4% | +43.1% | +12.2% | +29.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +123.5% | +168.5% | +129.0% | +67.6% | +101.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +9.4% | +21.5% | +33.0% | +24.7% | +17.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — HTH and WSFS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HTH is the less volatile stock with a 0.72 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BOKF's 1.03 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WSFS currently trades 98.4% 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 | 0.72x | 1.03x | 0.89x | 0.94x | 0.80x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $40.41 | $139.73 | $73.22 | $21.48 | $69.83 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $28.92 | $91.35 | $49.92 | $17.95 | $57.05 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.7% | +95.5% | +98.4% | +95.5% | +93.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.4 | 58.9 | 64.0 | 57.9 | 58.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 330K | 317K | 385K | 1.6M | 292K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — BOKF and CVBF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HTH as "Hold", BOKF as "Hold", WSFS as "Hold", CVBF as "Hold", BANR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 20.7% upside for CVBF (target: $25) vs -5.9% for HTH (target: $36). For income investors, CVBF offers the higher dividend yield at 3.98% vs WSFS's 0.95%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $36.00 | $131.57 | $74.67 | $24.75 | $70.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 21 | 13 | 16 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.9% | +1.7% | +0.9% | +4.0% | +3.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 10 | 11 | 1 | 4 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.72 | $2.24 | $0.68 | $0.82 | $1.96 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +8.1% | +0.9% | +7.6% | +2.9% | +1.6% |
CVBF leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). WSFS leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 4 tied.
HTH vs BOKF vs WSFS vs CVBF vs BANR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HTH or BOKF or WSFS or CVBF or BANR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, BOK Financial Corporation (BOKF) is the stronger pick with 10.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). 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 Hilltop Holdings Inc. (HTH) 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 — HTH or BOKF or WSFS or CVBF or BANR?
On trailing P/E, Banner Corporation (BANR) is the cheapest at 11.
6x versus BOK Financial Corporation at 16. 4x. 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: WSFS Financial Corporation wins at 0. 67x 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 — HTH or BOKF or WSFS or CVBF or BANR?
Over the past 5 years, BOK Financial Corporation (BOKF) delivered a total return of +59.
4%, compared to +12. 2% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BOKF returned +168. 5% 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 — HTH or BOKF or WSFS or CVBF or BANR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Hilltop Holdings Inc.
(HTH) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 72β versus BOK Financial Corporation's 1. 03β — meaning BOKF is approximately 44% more volatile than HTH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 80% for BOK Financial Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HTH or BOKF or WSFS or CVBF or BANR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), BOK Financial Corporation (BOKF) is pulling ahead at 10.
4% versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hilltop Holdings Inc. grew EPS 51. 7% year-over-year, compared to 1. 5% for BOK 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.
06Which has better profit margins — HTH or BOKF or WSFS or CVBF or BANR?
CVB Financial Corp.
(CVBF) is the more profitable company, earning 32. 5% net margin versus 10. 2% for Hilltop Holdings 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 13. 6% for HTH. 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 HTH or BOKF or WSFS or CVBF 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, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 67x 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 16. 1x for Hilltop Holdings Inc. — 5. 6x 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 — HTH or BOKF or WSFS or CVBF or BANR?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) offers the highest yield at 4. 0%, versus 0. 9% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS).
09Is HTH or BOKF or WSFS or CVBF or BANR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Hilltop Holdings Inc.
(HTH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 72), 1. 9% yield, +123. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (HTH: +123. 5%, BOKF: +168. 5%), 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 HTH and BOKF and WSFS and CVBF 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.