Build Your Comparison

Side-by-side financial analysis
LEO logo
LEO
MS logo
MS
JPM logo
JPM
GS logo
GS
ICE logo
ICE
Try popular comparisons:

Stock Comparison

LEO vs MS vs JPM vs GS vs ICE

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
LEO
BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc.

Asset Management

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$397M
5Y Perf.-17.8%
MS
Morgan Stanley

Financial - Capital Markets

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$340.97B
5Y Perf.+343.1%
JPM
JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Banks - Diversified

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$896.00B
5Y Perf.+241.0%
GS
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

Financial - Capital Markets

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$337.53B
5Y Perf.+437.8%
ICE
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$79.60B
5Y Perf.+53.4%

LEO vs MS vs JPM vs GS vs ICE — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
LEO logoLEO
MS logoMS
JPM logoJPM
GS logoGS
ICE logoICE
IndustryAsset ManagementFinancial - Capital MarketsBanks - DiversifiedFinancial - Capital MarketsFinancial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Market Cap$397M$340.97B$896.00B$337.53B$79.60B
Revenue (TTM)$54M$114.98B$280.33B$125.10B$12.64B
Net Income (TTM)$60M$16.86B$57.05B$17.18B$3.30B
Gross Margin67.7%57.1%60.0%47.5%61.9%
Operating Margin114.4%19.1%25.9%17.5%38.7%
Forward P/E15.9x18.0x14.4x17.9x17.3x
Total Debt$139M$475.56B$942.38B$609.53B$20.28B
Cash & Equiv.$107K$111.69B$343.34B$164.26B$837M

LEO vs MS vs JPM vs GS vs ICELong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

LEO
MS
JPM
GS
ICE
StockJun 20Jun 26Return
BNY Mellon Strategi… (LEO)10082.2-17.8%
Morgan Stanley (MS)100443.1+343.1%
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM)100341.0+241.0%
The Goldman Sachs G… (GS)100537.8+437.8%
Intercontinental Ex… (ICE)100153.4+53.4%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: LEO vs MS vs JPM vs GS vs ICE

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: LEO and ICE are tied at the top with 2 categories each (5-stock set) — the right choice depends on your priorities. Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for profitability and margin quality and operational efficiency and capital deployment. MS, JPM, and GS also each lead in at least one category. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
LEO
BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc.
The Banking Pick

LEO has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.

  • Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.25, yield 3.8%
  • Lower volatility, beta 0.25, Low D/E 32.8%, current ratio 1.88x
  • Beta 0.25, yield 3.8%, current ratio 1.88x
  • NIM 3.4% vs MS's 0.7%
Best for: income & stability and sleep-well-at-night
MS
Morgan Stanley
The Banking Pick

MS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.

  • Rev growth 11.5%, EPS growth 28.3%
  • 8.5% 10Y total return vs GS's 6.7%
  • 11.5% NII/revenue growth vs LEO's -107.1%
Best for: growth exposure and long-term compounding
JPM
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Banking Pick

JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.

  • PEG 0.81 vs ICE's 1.95
  • Lower P/E (14.4x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 1.95
Best for: valuation efficiency
GS
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
The Banking Pick

GS is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.

  • +72.7% vs ICE's -20.4%
Best for: momentum
ICE
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
The Banking Pick

ICE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.

  • Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
  • Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MS's 0.4%
Best for: quality and efficiency
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthMS logoMS11.5% NII/revenue growth vs LEO's -107.1%
ValueJPM logoJPMLower P/E (14.4x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 1.95
Quality / MarginsICE logoICEEfficiency ratio 0.2% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
Stability / SafetyLEO logoLEOBeta 0.25 vs GS's 1.60, lower leverage
DividendsLEO logoLEO3.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%
Momentum (1Y)GS logoGS+72.7% vs ICE's -20.4%
Efficiency (ROA)ICE logoICEEfficiency ratio 0.2% vs MS's 0.4%

LEO vs MS vs JPM vs GS vs ICE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

Discover the Fintech Stocks Theme

These companies are key players in the Fintech Stocks ecosystem. See how they stack up against the rest of the sector.

Explore Theme
LEOBNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc.

Segment breakdown not available.

MSMorgan Stanley
FY 2025
Institutional Securities Segment
46.4%$33.1B
Wealth Management Segment
44.5%$31.8B
Investment Management Segment
9.1%$6.5B
JPMJPMorgan Chase & Co.
FY 2025
Commercial And Investment Bank
43.0%$78.5B
Consumer & Community Banking
41.7%$76.0B
Asset and Wealth Management Segment
13.2%$24.1B
Segment Reporting, Reconciling Item, Corporate Nonsegment
3.9%$7.0B
Segment Reconciling Items
-1.7%$-3,134,000,000
GSThe Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
FY 2025
Global Markets
71.1%$41.5B
Investment Management
28.6%$16.7B
Platform Solutions
0.3%$151M
ICEIntercontinental Exchange, Inc.
FY 2025
Fixed Income And Data Services Segment
51.1%$1.4B
Exchanges Segment
38.8%$1.0B
Mortgage Technology Segment
10.1%$269M

LEO vs MS vs JPM vs GS vs ICE — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLLEOLAGGINGICE

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

LEO leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.

JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 5150.3x LEO's $54M. LEO is the more profitable business, keeping 111.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GS's 13.7%.

MetricLEO logoLEOBNY Mellon Strate…MS logoMSMorgan StanleyJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…ICE logoICEIntercontinental …
RevenueTrailing 12 months$54M$115.0B$280.3B$125.1B$12.6B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$37M$26.6B$81.4B$24.0B$6.5B
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$60M$16.9B$57.0B$17.2B$3.3B
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$25M-$17.9B$100.9B-$47.2B$4.3B
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+67.7%+57.1%+60.0%+47.5%+61.9%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+114.4%+19.1%+25.9%+17.5%+38.7%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+111.0%+14.7%+20.4%+13.7%+26.1%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+46.7%-15.6%+36.0%-37.7%+33.9%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-140.7%+48.9%+16.0%+45.8%+23.1%
LEO leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

Evenly matched — LEO and JPM each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 34% valuation discount to ICE's 24.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs ICE's 2.74x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricLEO logoLEOBNY Mellon Strate…MS logoMSMorgan StanleyJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…ICE logoICEIntercontinental …
Market CapShares × price$397M$341.0B$896.0B$337.5B$79.6B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$536M$704.8B$1.50T$782.8B$99.0B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS-30.38x20.98x16.00x20.71x24.36x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.15.95x18.00x14.40x17.93x17.34x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate2.19x0.90x1.32x2.74x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple26.49x18.36x32.57x15.34x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue2.97x3.20x2.70x6.30x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share0.94x3.03x2.47x2.70x2.77x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF31.41x7.40x8.88x18.56x
Evenly matched — LEO and JPM each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

Evenly matched — LEO and ICE each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $12 for ICE. LEO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.33x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 4.88x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs GS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricLEO logoLEOBNY Mellon Strate…MS logoMSMorgan StanleyJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…ICE logoICEIntercontinental …
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+13.9%+15.3%+15.9%+13.6%+11.6%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+9.2%+1.2%+1.3%+1.0%+2.3%
ROICReturn on invested capital-1.7%+3.1%+4.5%+2.2%+7.5%
ROCEReturn on capital employed-2.2%+3.3%+8.9%+4.0%+9.5%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–957559
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage0.33x4.22x2.60x4.88x0.70x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$139M$363.9B$599.0B$445.3B$19.4B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$106,568$111.7B$343.3B$164.3B$837M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$139M$475.6B$942.4B$609.5B$20.3B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense5.53x0.45x0.74x0.33x6.53x
Evenly matched — LEO and ICE each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

GS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $30,053 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,810 for LEO. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +72.7% total return vs ICE's -20.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 48.1% vs LEO's 5.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricLEO logoLEOBNY Mellon Strate…MS logoMSMorgan StanleyJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…ICE logoICEIntercontinental …
YTD ReturnYear-to-date+2.5%+18.8%-0.5%+17.2%-11.8%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+15.1%+65.3%+21.8%+72.7%-20.4%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+17.4%+157.5%+138.2%+224.8%+34.6%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-11.9%+154.7%+118.2%+200.5%+30.9%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+8.0%+854.4%+465.8%+666.8%+195.3%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+5.5%+37.1%+33.6%+48.1%+10.4%
GS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — LEO and MS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

LEO is the less volatile stock with a 0.25 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GS's 1.60 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MS currently trades 97.7% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 74.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricLEO logoLEOBNY Mellon Strate…MS logoMSMorgan StanleyJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…ICE logoICEIntercontinental …
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5000.25x1.40x0.94x1.60x0.35x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$6.54$219.16$337.25$1095.89$189.35
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$5.71$128.81$262.71$609.59$136.67
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+97.5%+97.7%+95.1%+97.0%+74.2%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10048.462.259.157.331.9
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded209K4.5M7.0M1.9M3.2M
Evenly matched — LEO and MS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Evenly matched — LEO and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: MS as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", GS as "Hold", ICE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 38.0% upside for ICE (target: $194) vs -8.5% for GS (target: $973). For income investors, LEO offers the higher dividend yield at 3.76% vs ICE's 1.38%.

MetricLEO logoLEOBNY Mellon Strate…MS logoMSMorgan StanleyJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…ICE logoICEIntercontinental …
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellBuyBuyHoldBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$201.25$339.75$972.70$194.00
# AnalystsCovering analysts52615536
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+3.8%+1.9%+1.9%+1.6%+1.4%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises112151413
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$0.24$4.14$5.95$16.62$1.93
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap0.0%+1.7%+3.9%+3.7%+1.7%
Evenly matched — LEO and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

LEO leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). GS leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.

Best OverallBNY Mellon Strategic Munici… (LEO)Leads 1 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

LEO vs MS vs JPM vs GS vs ICE: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is LEO or MS or JPM or GS or ICE a better buy right now?

For growth investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger pick with 11.

5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -107. 1% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Morgan Stanley (MS) a "Buy" — based on 52 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — LEO or MS or JPM or GS or ICE?

On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.

(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. at 24. 4x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 1. 95x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — LEO or MS or JPM or GS or ICE?

Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) delivered a total return of +200. 5%, compared to -11. 9% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +854. 4% versus LEO's +8. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — LEO or MS or JPM or GS or ICE?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc.

(LEO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 25β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 60β — meaning GS is approximately 535% more volatile than LEO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 33% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — LEO or MS or JPM or GS or ICE?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Morgan Stanley (MS) is pulling ahead at 11.

5% versus -107. 1% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Morgan Stanley grew EPS 28. 3% year-over-year, compared to -117. 8% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — LEO or MS or JPM or GS or ICE?

BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc.

(LEO) is the more profitable company, earning 252. 7% net margin versus 13. 7% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 252. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LEO leads at 252. 7% versus 17. 5% for GS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LEO leads at 254. 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.

07

Is LEO or MS or JPM or GS or ICE 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 1. 95x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 18. 0x for Morgan Stanley — 3. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 38. 0% to $194. 00.

08

Which pays a better dividend — LEO or MS or JPM or GS or ICE?

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO) offers the highest yield at 3. 8%, versus 1. 4% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE).

09

Is LEO or MS or JPM or GS or ICE better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 35), 1. 4% yield, +195. 3% 10Y return). The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) carries a higher beta of 1. 60 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +195. 3%, GS: +666. 8%), 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.

10

What are the main differences between LEO and MS and JPM and GS and ICE?

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: LEO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MS is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; GS is a large-cap quality compounder stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder 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.