Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
HWBK vs FIS vs KO vs JPM vs BAC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Information Technology Services
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Diversified
HWBK vs FIS vs KO vs JPM vs BAC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Information Technology Services | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $260M | $20.26B | $355.61B | $896.00B | $422.78B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $112M | $11.66B | $49.28B | $280.33B | $191.57B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $24M | $2.67B | $13.70B | $57.05B | $30.51B |
| Gross Margin | 71.3% | 37.6% | 61.7% | 60.0% | 56.1% |
| Operating Margin | 26.0% | 17.9% | 29.3% | 25.9% | 19.7% |
| Forward P/E | 11.0x | 6.2x | 25.3x | 14.4x | 12.6x |
| Total Debt | $155M | $4.01B | $45.49B | $942.38B | $365.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $105M | $599M | $10.27B | $343.34B | $231.84B |
HWBK vs FIS vs KO vs JPM vs BAC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hawthorn Bancshares… (HWBK) | 100 | 215.4 | +115.4% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 29.2 | -70.8% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
| Bank of America Cor… (BAC) | 100 | 235.9 | +135.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HWBK vs FIS vs KO vs JPM vs BAC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HWBK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if bank quality is your priority.
- NIM 3.5% vs BAC's 1.8%
- Beta 0.35 vs JPM's 0.94, lower leverage
- +35.8% vs FIS's -49.4%
FIS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.61, yield 4.2%
- Rev growth 5.4%, EPS growth -47.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.61, Low D/E 28.9%, current ratio 0.59x
- PEG 0.26 vs KO's 2.26
KO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for quality and efficiency.
- 27.8% margin vs BAC's 15.9%
- 13.1% ROA vs BAC's 0.9%, ROIC 15.8% vs 3.5%
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs HWBK's 301.1%
Among these 5 stocks, BAC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.4% revenue growth vs BAC's -0.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.2x vs 14.4x), PEG 0.26 vs 0.81 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs BAC's 15.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs JPM's 0.94, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.2% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +35.8% vs FIS's -49.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs BAC's 0.9%, ROIC 15.8% vs 3.5% |
HWBK vs FIS vs KO vs JPM vs BAC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HWBK vs FIS vs KO vs JPM vs BAC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FIS leads in 1 of 6 categories
KO leads 1 • JPM leads 1 • HWBK leads 0 • BAC leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — FIS and KO each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 2501.1x HWBK's $112M. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BAC's 15.9%. On growth, FIS holds the edge at +30.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $112M | $11.7B | $49.3B | $280.3B | $191.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $31M | $4.1B | $15.5B | $81.4B | $40.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $24M | $2.7B | $13.7B | $57.0B | $30.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $23M | $2.8B | $12.6B | $100.9B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +71.3% | +37.6% | +61.7% | +60.0% | +56.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +26.0% | +17.9% | +29.3% | +25.9% | +19.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +21.2% | +22.9% | +27.8% | +20.4% | +15.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +20.4% | +23.9% | +25.5% | +36.0% | +6.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +30.1% | +12.1% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +36.4% | +30.6% | +18.2% | +16.0% | +18.3% |
Valuation Metrics
FIS leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.0x trailing earnings, HWBK trades at a 79% valuation discount to FIS's 52.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $260M | $20.3B | $355.6B | $896.0B | $422.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $310M | $23.7B | $390.8B | $1.50T | $556.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 10.99x | 52.27x | 27.18x | 16.00x | 14.66x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 6.24x | 25.27x | 14.40x | 12.56x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.93x | 2.14x | 2.43x | 0.90x | 0.95x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.89x | 6.50x | 26.39x | 18.36x | 13.92x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.32x | 1.90x | 7.42x | 3.20x | 2.21x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.51x | 1.46x | 10.40x | 2.47x | 1.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.37x | 7.21x | 67.15x | 8.88x | 33.52x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $10 for BAC. FIS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.29x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs JPM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +14.7% | +18.4% | +41.1% | +15.9% | +10.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.3% | +7.5% | +13.1% | +1.3% | +0.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.1% | +6.0% | +15.8% | +4.5% | +3.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.2% | +6.6% | +17.3% | +8.9% | +4.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.89x | 0.29x | 1.33x | 2.60x | 1.21x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $50M | $3.4B | $35.2B | $599.0B | $134.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $105M | $599M | $10.3B | $343.3B | $231.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $155M | $4.0B | $45.5B | $942.4B | $365.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.92x | 21.16x | 10.70x | 0.74x | 0.48x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,267 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, HWBK leads with a +35.8% total return vs FIS's -49.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs FIS's -6.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +12.0% | -38.9% | +20.3% | -0.5% | +1.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +35.8% | -49.4% | +17.2% | +21.8% | +28.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +123.4% | -18.9% | +47.0% | +138.2% | +103.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +95.3% | -67.3% | +65.6% | +118.2% | +47.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +301.1% | -25.6% | +121.1% | +465.8% | +368.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +30.7% | -6.8% | +13.7% | +33.6% | +26.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — HWBK and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than JPM's 0.94 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HWBK currently trades 99.3% from its 52-week high vs FIS's 47.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.35x | 0.61x | -0.20x | 0.94x | 0.86x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $37.98 | $82.74 | $84.04 | $337.25 | $57.55 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $27.07 | $37.91 | $65.35 | $262.71 | $43.66 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.3% | +47.4% | +98.3% | +95.1% | +97.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.4 | 30.8 | 60.6 | 59.1 | 68.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 8K | 5.6M | 12.7M | 7.0M | 31.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FIS and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FIS as "Buy", KO as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", BAC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 60.4% upside for FIS (target: $63) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, FIS offers the higher dividend yield at 4.16% vs JPM's 1.86%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $62.88 | $86.13 | $339.75 | $61.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 37 | 48 | 61 | 54 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.1% | +4.2% | +2.5% | +1.9% | +2.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 14 | 1 | 56 | 15 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.78 | $1.63 | $2.04 | $5.95 | $1.27 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.1% | +7.0% | +0.2% | +3.9% | +5.1% |
FIS leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). KO leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
HWBK vs FIS vs KO vs JPM vs BAC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HWBK or FIS or KO or JPM or BAC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.
(FIS) is the stronger pick with 5. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 5% for Bank of America Corporation (BAC). Hawthorn Bancshares, Inc. (HWBK) offers the better valuation at 11. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) a "Buy" — based on 37 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 — HWBK or FIS or KO or JPM or BAC?
On trailing P/E, Hawthorn Bancshares, Inc.
(HWBK) is the cheapest at 11. 0x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 52. 3x. On forward P/E, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 2x — 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: Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. wins at 0. 26x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HWBK or FIS or KO or JPM or BAC?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -67. 3% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus FIS's -25. 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 — HWBK or FIS or KO or JPM or BAC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. 's 0. 94β — meaning JPM is approximately -571% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 29% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HWBK or FIS or KO or JPM or BAC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.
(FIS) is pulling ahead at 5. 4% versus -0. 5% for Bank of America Corporation (BAC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hawthorn Bancshares, Inc. grew EPS 31. 4% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, KO leads at 3. 7% annualised revenue growth. 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 — HWBK or FIS or KO or JPM or BAC?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 16. 5% for FIS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HWBK leads at 71. 3%, 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 HWBK or FIS or KO or JPM or BAC 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, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 26x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) trades at 6. 2x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 19. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 60. 4% to $62. 88.
08Which pays a better dividend — HWBK or FIS or KO or JPM or BAC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) offers the highest yield at 4. 2%, versus 1. 9% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM).
09Is HWBK or FIS or KO or JPM or BAC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, FIS: -25. 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.
10What are the main differences between HWBK and FIS and KO and JPM and BAC?
These companies operate in different sectors (HWBK (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and JPM (Financial Services) and BAC (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: HWBK is a small-cap deep-value stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; BAC is a large-cap deep-value 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.