Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ISBA vs LKFN vs MBWM vs CZWI vs FIS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Information Technology Services
ISBA vs LKFN vs MBWM vs CZWI vs FIS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Information Technology Services |
| Market Cap | $305M | $1.63B | $898M | $203M | $24.47B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $112M | $422M | $372M | $90M | $10.89B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $19M | $103M | $89M | $14M | $382M |
| Gross Margin | 70.6% | 61.0% | 64.0% | 54.7% | 38.1% |
| Operating Margin | 19.8% | 29.8% | 27.5% | 7.0% | 17.5% |
| Forward P/E | 11.7x | 14.4x | 9.5x | 11.8x | 7.5x |
| Total Debt | $143M | $184M | $826M | $52M | $4.01B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $23M | $57M | $473M | $119M | $599M |
ISBA vs LKFN vs MBWM vs CZWI vs FIS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Isabella Bank Corpo… (ISBA) | 100 | 251.8 | +151.8% |
| Lakeland Financial … (LKFN) | 100 | 146.6 | +46.6% |
| Mercantile Bank Cor… (MBWM) | 100 | 226.7 | +126.7% |
| Citizens Community … (CZWI) | 100 | 286.8 | +186.8% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 34.0 | -66.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ISBA vs LKFN vs MBWM vs CZWI vs FIS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ISBA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 10.1%, EPS growth 37.6%
- 10.1% NII/revenue growth vs CZWI's -9.4%
- Beta 0.21 vs MBWM's 0.87, lower leverage
- +63.1% vs FIS's -35.3%
LKFN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and bank quality is your priority.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.79, yield 3.2%
- NIM 3.2% vs ISBA's 2.8%
- 24.5% margin vs FIS's 3.5%
- 1.5% ROA vs CZWI's 0.8%, ROIC 11.6% vs 2.0%
MBWM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 178.2% 10Y total return vs CZWI's 157.0%
CZWI is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.46, Low D/E 27.6%, current ratio 3015.31x
FIS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency and defensive.
- PEG 0.31 vs LKFN's 3.63
- Beta 0.76, yield 3.5%, current ratio 0.59x
- Lower P/E (7.5x vs 9.5x), PEG 0.31 vs 0.63
- 3.5% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs LKFN's 3.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.1% NII/revenue growth vs CZWI's -9.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.5x vs 9.5x), PEG 0.31 vs 0.63 | |
| Quality / Margins | 24.5% margin vs FIS's 3.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.21 vs MBWM's 0.87, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.5% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs LKFN's 3.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +63.1% vs FIS's -35.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.5% ROA vs CZWI's 0.8%, ROIC 11.6% vs 2.0% |
ISBA vs LKFN vs MBWM vs CZWI vs FIS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ISBA vs LKFN vs MBWM vs CZWI vs FIS — 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
LKFN leads 1 • CZWI leads 1 • ISBA leads 0 • MBWM leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — LKFN and FIS each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FIS is the larger business by revenue, generating $10.9B annually — 121.0x CZWI's $90M. LKFN is the more profitable business, keeping 24.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FIS's 3.5%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $112M | $422M | $372M | $90M | $10.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $22M | $130M | $107M | $9M | $3.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $19M | $103M | $89M | $14M | $382M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $23M | $104M | $11M | $11M | $2.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.6% | +61.0% | +64.0% | +54.7% | +38.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +19.8% | +29.8% | +27.5% | +7.0% | +17.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +16.9% | +24.5% | +23.9% | +16.0% | +3.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +20.8% | +24.6% | +3.0% | +11.5% | +26.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | +8.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +18.5% | +23.4% | +14.8% | +63.0% | +92.3% |
Valuation Metrics
FIS leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.5x trailing earnings, MBWM trades at a 85% valuation discount to FIS's 63.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MBWM offers better value at 0.63x vs LKFN's 3.93x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $305M | $1.6B | $898M | $203M | $24.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $424M | $1.8B | $1.3B | $136M | $27.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 16.23x | 15.61x | 9.53x | 14.44x | 63.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.70x | 14.42x | 9.54x | 11.78x | 7.54x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.17x | 3.93x | 0.63x | 2.85x | 2.58x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 19.16x | 13.49x | 11.75x | 15.28x | 7.66x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.72x | 3.87x | 2.42x | 2.25x | 2.29x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.32x | 2.12x | 1.17x | 1.09x | 1.76x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 13.05x | 15.72x | 80.15x | 19.55x | 9.97x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LKFN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LKFN delivers a 14.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $3 for FIS. LKFN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.24x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MBWM's 1.14x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ISBA scores 8/9 vs MBWM's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.5% | +14.2% | +13.5% | +7.8% | +2.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.9% | +1.5% | +1.4% | +0.8% | +1.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.8% | +11.6% | +5.5% | +2.0% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.4% | +15.8% | +8.0% | +0.6% | +6.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.62x | 0.24x | 1.14x | 0.28x | 0.29x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $120M | $127M | $353M | -$67M | $3.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $23M | $57M | $473M | $119M | $599M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $143M | $184M | $826M | $52M | $4.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.66x | 0.82x | 0.79x | 0.16x | 4.64x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CZWI leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ISBA five years ago would be worth $20,695 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,685 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, ISBA leads with a +63.1% total return vs FIS's -35.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CZWI at 37.5% vs FIS's -2.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -16.9% | +12.7% | +10.1% | +21.5% | -27.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +63.1% | +9.0% | +23.6% | +45.6% | -35.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +124.2% | +48.1% | +127.3% | +160.0% | -6.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +106.9% | +10.5% | +78.4% | +71.2% | -63.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +87.1% | +142.7% | +178.2% | +157.0% | -13.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +30.9% | +14.0% | +31.5% | +37.5% | -2.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ISBA and MBWM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ISBA is the less volatile stock with a 0.21 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MBWM's 0.87 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MBWM currently trades 93.3% from its 52-week high vs FIS's 57.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.21x | 0.79x | 0.87x | 0.46x | 0.76x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $58.83 | $69.40 | $55.77 | $22.62 | $82.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $24.68 | $54.36 | $42.17 | $12.83 | $43.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +70.6% | +90.2% | +93.3% | +93.2% | +57.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.1 | 60.9 | 53.1 | 63.7 | 43.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 32K | 153K | 112K | 40K | 5.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — LKFN and FIS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ISBA as "Hold", LKFN as "Hold", MBWM as "Buy", CZWI as "Buy", FIS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.6% upside for FIS (target: $67) vs 5.4% for LKFN (target: $66). For income investors, FIS offers the higher dividend yield at 3.45% vs CZWI's 1.76%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $47.00 | $66.00 | $57.00 | — | $67.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 10 | 7 | 2 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +3.2% | +2.8% | +1.8% | +3.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | 12 | 6 | 7 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.10 | $2.00 | $1.47 | $0.37 | $1.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.5% | +1.2% | 0.0% | +3.1% | 0.0% |
FIS leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). LKFN leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
ISBA vs LKFN vs MBWM vs CZWI vs FIS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ISBA or LKFN or MBWM or CZWI or FIS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Isabella Bank Corporation (ISBA) is the stronger pick with 10.
1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 4% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI). Mercantile Bank Corporation (MBWM) offers the better valuation at 9. 5x trailing P/E (9. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Mercantile Bank Corporation (MBWM) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — ISBA or LKFN or MBWM or CZWI or FIS?
On trailing P/E, Mercantile Bank Corporation (MBWM) is the cheapest at 9.
5x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 63. 0x. On forward P/E, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 5x — 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. 31x versus Lakeland Financial Corporation's 3. 63x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ISBA or LKFN or MBWM or CZWI or FIS?
Over the past 5 years, Isabella Bank Corporation (ISBA) delivered a total return of +106.
9%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MBWM returned +178. 2% versus FIS's -13. 2%. 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 — ISBA or LKFN or MBWM or CZWI or FIS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Isabella Bank Corporation (ISBA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
21β versus Mercantile Bank Corporation's 0. 87β — meaning MBWM is approximately 306% more volatile than ISBA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lakeland Financial Corporation (LKFN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 24% versus 114% for Mercantile Bank Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ISBA or LKFN or MBWM or CZWI or FIS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Isabella Bank Corporation (ISBA) is pulling ahead at 10.
1% versus -9. 4% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Isabella Bank Corporation grew EPS 37. 6% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, 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 — ISBA or LKFN or MBWM or CZWI or FIS?
Lakeland Financial Corporation (LKFN) is the more profitable company, earning 24.
5% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 24. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LKFN leads at 29. 8% versus 7. 0% for CZWI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ISBA leads at 70. 6%, 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 ISBA or LKFN or MBWM or CZWI or FIS 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. 31x versus Lakeland Financial Corporation's 3. 63x. 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 7. 5x forward P/E versus 14. 4x for Lakeland Financial Corporation — 6. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 42. 6% to $67. 38.
08Which pays a better dividend — ISBA or LKFN or MBWM or CZWI or FIS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) offers the highest yield at 3. 5%, versus 1. 8% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI).
09Is ISBA or LKFN or MBWM or CZWI or FIS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Isabella Bank Corporation (ISBA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
21), 2. 6% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ISBA: +87. 1%, FIS: -13. 2%), 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 ISBA and LKFN and MBWM and CZWI and FIS?
These companies operate in different sectors (ISBA (Financial Services) and LKFN (Financial Services) and MBWM (Financial Services) and CZWI (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ISBA is a small-cap deep-value stock; LKFN is a small-cap deep-value stock; MBWM is a small-cap deep-value stock; CZWI is a small-cap deep-value stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented 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.