Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
IFS vs BAP vs BSAC vs BBD vs ITUB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
IFS vs BAP vs BSAC vs BBD vs ITUB — 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 | $4.98B | $25.51B | $14.38B | $39.57B | $90.15B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $8.86B | $27.00B | $4.66T | $342.23B | $384.58B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.92B | $6.47B | $1.05T | $23.21B | $44.86B |
| Gross Margin | 54.2% | 64.2% | 48.8% | 34.6% | 34.5% |
| Operating Margin | 18.6% | 29.0% | 26.7% | -1.1% | 13.1% |
| Forward P/E | 2.3x | 3.4x | 0.0x | 1.4x | 1.7x |
| Total Debt | $11.82B | $37.49B | $15.88T | $798.39B | $1.01T |
| Cash & Equiv. | $12.20B | $47.51B | $5.24T | $160.84B | $270.61B |
IFS vs BAP vs BSAC vs BBD vs ITUB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intercorp Financial… (IFS) | 100 | 181.0 | +81.0% |
| Credicorp Ltd. (BAP) | 100 | 233.3 | +133.3% |
| Banco Santander-Chi… (BSAC) | 100 | 193.6 | +93.6% |
| Banco Bradesco S.A. (BBD) | 100 | 130.8 | +30.8% |
| Itaú Unibanco Holdi… (ITUB) | 100 | 257.2 | +157.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IFS vs BAP vs BSAC vs BBD vs ITUB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IFS is the clearest fit if your priority is stability.
- Beta 0.65 vs BBD's 1.15, lower leverage
BAP is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.81, current ratio 0.53x
- Beta 0.81, yield 4.1%, current ratio 0.53x
- NIM 5.5% vs ITUB's 1.2%
BSAC has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 100.0%
- Lower P/E (0.0x vs 1.4x)
- 100.0% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs ITUB's 10.4%
BBD is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 37.1%, EPS growth 34.4%
- 37.1% NII/revenue growth vs BSAC's -5.0%
- +76.0% vs BSAC's +32.8%
ITUB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 188.7% 10Y total return vs BAP's 181.0%
- PEG 0.08 vs BAP's 0.64
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BBD's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BBD's 0.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 37.1% NII/revenue growth vs BSAC's -5.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.0x vs 1.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BBD's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.65 vs BBD's 1.15, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 100.0% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs ITUB's 10.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +76.0% vs BSAC's +32.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BBD's 0.4% |
IFS vs BAP vs BSAC vs BBD vs ITUB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BAP leads in 3 of 6 categories
BSAC leads 1 • IFS leads 0 • BBD leads 0 • ITUB leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BAP leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BSAC is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.66T annually — 526.1x IFS's $8.9B. BSAC is the more profitable business, keeping 21.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BBD's 6.8%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $8.9B | $27.0B | $4.66T | $342.2B | $384.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.8B | $10.4B | $1.45T | -$1.4B | $57.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.9B | $6.5B | $1.05T | $23.2B | $44.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2.3B | $4.6B | $776.1B | -$201.5B | $117.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +54.2% | +64.2% | +48.8% | +34.6% | +34.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +18.6% | +29.0% | +26.7% | -1.1% | +13.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +14.7% | +20.4% | +21.9% | +6.8% | +11.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -21.3% | +49.7% | +13.4% | -92.3% | +33.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +20.1% | +14.1% | -8.2% | +46.2% | -11.4% |
Valuation Metrics
BSAC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 0.0x trailing earnings, BSAC trades at a 100% valuation discount to BAP's 16.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BSAC offers better value at 0.00x vs BAP's 3.08x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.0B | $25.5B | $14.4B | $39.6B | $90.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.9B | $22.6B | $26.3B | $168.4B | $240.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.65x | 16.11x | 0.03x | 8.45x | 10.30x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 2.25x | 3.37x | 0.01x | 1.39x | 1.74x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 3.08x | 0.00x | 1.04x | 0.50x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.20x | 9.16x | 17.04x | — | 20.62x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.95x | 3.27x | 2.77x | 0.57x | 1.16x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.62x | 2.53x | 0.03x | 1.09x | 2.11x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 6.59x | 20.64x | — | 3.48x |
Profitability & Efficiency
BAP leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BSAC delivers a 21.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $13 for BBD. BAP carries lower financial leverage with a 1.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ITUB's 4.71x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BAP scores 8/9 vs ITUB's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +16.1% | +17.4% | +21.5% | +13.2% | +20.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.0% | +2.5% | +1.6% | +1.1% | +1.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.7% | +8.2% | +4.5% | -0.3% | +3.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.2% | +10.1% | +3.4% | -0.3% | +2.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.08x | 1.07x | 2.77x | 4.46x | 4.71x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$379M | -$10.0B | $10.64T | $637.5B | $742.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $12.2B | $47.5B | $5.24T | $160.8B | $270.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $11.8B | $37.5B | $15.88T | $798.4B | $1.01T |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.99x | 1.99x | 0.72x | -0.03x | 0.23x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BAP leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BAP five years ago would be worth $29,447 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,552 for BBD. Over the past 12 months, BBD leads with a +76.0% total return vs BSAC's +32.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BAP at 33.7% vs BBD's 13.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +14.3% | +12.2% | +2.7% | +12.8% | +14.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +39.4% | +66.0% | +32.8% | +76.0% | +44.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +125.5% | +138.9% | +74.3% | +44.5% | +102.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +121.2% | +194.5% | +54.5% | +15.5% | +149.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +60.3% | +181.0% | +125.2% | +57.1% | +188.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +31.1% | +33.7% | +20.4% | +13.1% | +26.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — IFS and BBD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IFS is the less volatile stock with a 0.65 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BBD's 1.15 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BBD currently trades 87.0% from its 52-week high vs BSAC's 80.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.65x | 0.81x | 0.94x | 1.15x | 1.11x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $52.91 | $380.20 | $37.72 | $4.30 | $9.60 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $34.18 | $193.13 | $22.77 | $2.26 | $6.07 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +84.8% | +84.6% | +80.9% | +87.0% | +85.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.7 | 48.1 | 40.3 | 48.7 | 42.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 270K | 358K | 453K | 38.4M | 24.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — BSAC and ITUB each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: IFS as "Buy", BAP as "Hold", BSAC as "Hold", BBD as "Hold", ITUB as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 26.9% upside for BAP (target: $408) vs -32.0% for IFS (target: $31). For income investors, BSAC offers the higher dividend yield at 100.00% vs IFS's 2.41%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $30.50 | $408.00 | $33.50 | $3.20 | $6.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 15 | 12 | 15 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.4% | +4.1% | +100.0% | +6.0% | +10.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $3.74 | $46.03 | $484767.98 | $1.12 | $4.23 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.7% | +0.1% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +0.7% |
BAP leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). BSAC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
IFS vs BAP vs BSAC vs BBD vs ITUB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IFS or BAP or BSAC or BBD or ITUB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Banco Bradesco S.
A. (BBD) is the stronger pick with 37. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 0% for Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC). Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) offers the better valuation at 0. 0x trailing P/E (0. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Intercorp Financial Services Inc. (IFS) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — IFS or BAP or BSAC or BBD or ITUB?
On trailing P/E, Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) is the cheapest at 0.
0x versus Credicorp Ltd. at 16. 1x. On forward P/E, Banco Santander-Chile is actually cheaper at 0. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Itaú Unibanco Holding S. A. wins at 0. 08x versus Credicorp Ltd. 's 0. 64x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IFS or BAP or BSAC or BBD or ITUB?
Over the past 5 years, Credicorp Ltd.
(BAP) delivered a total return of +194. 5%, compared to +15. 5% for Banco Bradesco S. A. (BBD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ITUB returned +188. 7% versus BBD's +57. 1%. 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 — IFS or BAP or BSAC or BBD or ITUB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercorp Financial Services Inc.
(IFS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 65β versus Banco Bradesco S. A. 's 1. 15β — meaning BBD is approximately 76% more volatile than IFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Credicorp Ltd. (BAP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 107% versus 5% for Itaú Unibanco Holding S. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IFS or BAP or BSAC or BBD or ITUB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Banco Bradesco S.
A. (BBD) is pulling ahead at 37. 1% versus -5. 0% for Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Banco Santander-Chile grew EPS 492. 6% year-over-year, compared to 4. 0% for Itaú Unibanco Holding S. A.. 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 — IFS or BAP or BSAC or BBD or ITUB?
Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) is the more profitable company, earning 21.
9% net margin versus 6. 8% for Banco Bradesco S. A. — meaning it keeps 21. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BAP leads at 29. 0% versus -1. 1% for BBD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BAP leads at 64. 2%, 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 IFS or BAP or BSAC or BBD or ITUB 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, Itaú Unibanco Holding S. A. (ITUB) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 08x versus Credicorp Ltd. 's 0. 64x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) trades at 0. 0x forward P/E versus 3. 4x for Credicorp Ltd. — 3. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BAP: 26. 9% to $408. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — IFS or BAP or BSAC or BBD or ITUB?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) offers the highest yield at 100. 0%, versus 2. 4% for Intercorp Financial Services Inc. (IFS).
09Is IFS or BAP or BSAC or BBD or ITUB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Intercorp Financial Services Inc.
(IFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 65), 2. 4% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (IFS: +60. 3%, BBD: +57. 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 IFS and BAP and BSAC and BBD and ITUB?
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: IFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; BAP is a mid-cap deep-value stock; BSAC is a mid-cap deep-value stock; BBD is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ITUB is a mid-cap high-growth 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.