Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
HWC vs UBSI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
HWC vs UBSI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $5.55B | $6.06B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.02B | $1.82B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $486M | $465M |
| Gross Margin | 73.1% | 65.4% |
| Operating Margin | 31.0% | 32.4% |
| Forward P/E | 10.7x | 12.0x |
| Total Debt | $1.34B | $921M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $563M | $2.54B |
HWC vs UBSI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hancock Whitney Cor… (HWC) | 100 | 315.0 | +215.0% |
| United Bankshares, … (UBSI) | 100 | 149.3 | +49.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HWC vs UBSI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HWC is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 223.3% 10Y total return vs UBSI's 52.4%
- Lower P/E (10.7x vs 12.0x)
- +31.0% vs UBSI's +28.2%
UBSI carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 5 yrs, beta 0.95, yield 3.4%
- Rev growth 12.3%, EPS growth 18.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.95, Low D/E 16.8%, current ratio 28.21x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 12.3% NII/revenue growth vs HWC's -1.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.7x vs 12.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs HWC's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.95 vs HWC's 1.14, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.4% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs HWC's 2.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +31.0% vs UBSI's +28.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs HWC's 0.4% |
HWC vs UBSI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HWC vs UBSI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
UBSI leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HWC and UBSI operate at a comparable scale, with $2.0B and $1.8B in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 25.5% (UBSI) to 24.1% (HWC).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.0B | $1.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $656M | $590M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $486M | $465M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $523M | $487M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +73.1% | +65.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +31.0% | +32.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +24.1% | +25.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +25.9% | +26.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.4% | +30.0% |
Valuation Metrics
HWC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.0x trailing earnings, HWC trades at a 10% valuation discount to UBSI's 13.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, UBSI's 7.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HWC's 9.7x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.6B | $6.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.3B | $4.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 11.99x | 13.28x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.70x | 11.99x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.08x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.65x | 7.53x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.75x | 3.33x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.29x | 1.11x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 10.62x | 12.60x |
Profitability & Efficiency
UBSI leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HWC delivers a 11.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $9 for UBSI. UBSI carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HWC's 0.30x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), UBSI scores 7/9 vs HWC's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +11.1% | +8.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.4% | +1.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.6% | +7.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.2% | +3.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.30x | 0.17x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $775M | -$1.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $563M | $2.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.3B | $921M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.23x | 1.01x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HWC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HWC five years ago would be worth $15,222 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,368 for UBSI. Over the past 12 months, HWC leads with a +31.0% total return vs UBSI's +28.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HWC at 29.6% vs UBSI's 17.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.2% | +14.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +31.0% | +28.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +117.7% | +61.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +52.2% | +23.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +223.3% | +52.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +29.6% | +17.4% |
Risk & Volatility
UBSI leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
UBSI is the less volatile stock with a 0.95 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HWC's 1.14 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. UBSI currently trades 94.5% from its 52-week high vs HWC's 90.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.14x | 0.95x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $75.43 | $45.93 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $52.89 | $34.10 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.3% | +94.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.1 | 55.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 779K | 916K |
Analyst Outlook
UBSI leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates HWC as "Buy" and UBSI as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 14.2% upside for HWC (target: $78) vs 7.5% for UBSI (target: $47). For income investors, UBSI offers the higher dividend yield at 3.42% vs HWC's 2.68%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $77.75 | $46.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 23 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.7% | +3.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.82 | $1.48 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.4% | +2.1% |
UBSI leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). HWC leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns).
HWC vs UBSI: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HWC or UBSI a better buy right now?
For growth investors, United Bankshares, Inc.
(UBSI) is the stronger pick with 12. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 5% for Hancock Whitney Corporation (HWC). Hancock Whitney Corporation (HWC) offers the better valuation at 12. 0x trailing P/E (10. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Hancock Whitney Corporation (HWC) a "Buy" — based on 23 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 — HWC or UBSI?
On trailing P/E, Hancock Whitney Corporation (HWC) is the cheapest at 12.
0x versus United Bankshares, Inc. at 13. 3x. On forward P/E, Hancock Whitney Corporation is actually cheaper at 10. 7x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HWC or UBSI?
Over the past 5 years, Hancock Whitney Corporation (HWC) delivered a total return of +52.
2%, compared to +23. 7% for United Bankshares, Inc. (UBSI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HWC returned +223. 3% versus UBSI's +52. 4%. 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 — HWC or UBSI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), United Bankshares, Inc.
(UBSI) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 95β versus Hancock Whitney Corporation's 1. 14β — meaning HWC is approximately 20% more volatile than UBSI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, United Bankshares, Inc. (UBSI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 30% for Hancock Whitney Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HWC or UBSI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), United Bankshares, Inc.
(UBSI) is pulling ahead at 12. 3% versus -1. 5% for Hancock Whitney Corporation (HWC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: United Bankshares, Inc. grew EPS 18. 9% year-over-year, compared to 7. 6% for Hancock Whitney 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 — HWC or UBSI?
United Bankshares, Inc.
(UBSI) is the more profitable company, earning 25. 5% net margin versus 24. 1% for Hancock Whitney Corporation — meaning it keeps 25. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UBSI leads at 32. 4% versus 31. 0% for HWC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HWC leads at 73. 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 HWC or UBSI more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Hancock Whitney Corporation (HWC) trades at 10.
7x forward P/E versus 12. 0x for United Bankshares, Inc. — 1. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HWC: 14. 2% to $77. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — HWC or UBSI?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
United Bankshares, Inc. (UBSI) offers the highest yield at 3. 4%, versus 2. 7% for Hancock Whitney Corporation (HWC).
09Is HWC or UBSI better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, United Bankshares, Inc.
(UBSI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 95), 3. 4% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UBSI: +52. 4%, HWC: +223. 3%), 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 HWC and UBSI?
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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.