Asset Management
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
LEO vs MSCI vs JPM vs ICE vs WFC vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Banks - Diversified
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Banks - Diversified
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
LEO vs MSCI vs JPM vs ICE vs WFC vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Banks - Diversified | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Banks - Diversified | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $397M | $43.62B | $896.00B | $79.60B | $269.43B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $54M | $3.24B | $280.33B | $12.64B | $123.53B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $60M | $1.32B | $57.05B | $3.30B | $21.34B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 67.7% | 82.9% | 60.0% | 61.9% | 64.8% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 114.4% | 55.4% | 25.9% | 38.7% | 20.4% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 15.9x | 30.5x | 14.4x | 17.3x | 12.0x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $139M | $6.31B | $942.38B | $20.28B | $425.72B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $107K | $515M | $343.34B | $837M | $174.21B | $10.27B |
LEO vs MSCI vs JPM vs ICE vs WFC vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BNY Mellon Strategi… (LEO) | 100 | 82.2 | -17.8% |
| MSCI Inc. (MSCI) | 100 | 179.5 | +79.5% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 153.4 | +53.4% |
| Wells Fargo & Compa… (WFC) | 100 | 327.1 | +227.1% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LEO vs MSCI vs JPM vs ICE vs WFC vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LEO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for 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 JPM's 2.2%
MSCI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth and efficiency is your priority.
- 9.7% NII/revenue growth vs LEO's -107.1%
- 24.0% ROA vs WFC's 1.0%, ROIC 34.9% vs 3.5%
JPM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs MSCI's 7.4%
- +21.8% vs ICE's -20.4%
ICE is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 7.5%, EPS growth 20.7%
WFC is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.16 vs KO's 2.26
- Lower P/E (12.0x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.16 vs 2.26
KO doesn't hold a clear category lead here; it's more of a secondary option in this specific comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.7% NII/revenue growth vs LEO's -107.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.0x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.16 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 111.0% margin vs WFC's 17.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.25 vs JPM's 0.94, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +21.8% vs ICE's -20.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 24.0% ROA vs WFC's 1.0%, ROIC 34.9% vs 3.5% |
LEO vs MSCI vs JPM vs ICE vs WFC vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LEO vs MSCI vs JPM vs ICE vs WFC vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSCI leads in 1 of 6 categories
WFC leads 1 • JPM leads 1 • KO leads 1 • LEO leads 0 • ICE leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSCI leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
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 WFC's 17.3%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $54M | $3.2B | $280.3B | $12.6B | $123.5B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $37M | $2.0B | $81.4B | $6.5B | $32.9B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $60M | $1.3B | $57.0B | $3.3B | $21.3B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $25M | $1.5B | $100.9B | $4.3B | -$19.0B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.7% | +82.9% | +60.0% | +61.9% | +64.8% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +114.4% | +55.4% | +25.9% | +38.7% | +20.4% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +111.0% | +40.7% | +20.4% | +26.1% | +17.3% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +46.7% | +47.4% | +36.0% | +33.9% | -15.4% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -140.7% | +49.1% | +16.0% | +23.1% | +16.9% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
WFC leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.3x trailing earnings, WFC trades at a 66% valuation discount to MSCI's 38.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), WFC offers better value at 0.18x vs ICE's 2.74x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $397M | $43.6B | $896.0B | $79.6B | $269.4B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $536M | $49.4B | $1.50T | $99.0B | $520.9B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -30.38x | 38.50x | 16.00x | 24.36x | 13.25x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.95x | 30.47x | 14.40x | 17.34x | 11.96x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.27x | 0.90x | 2.74x | 0.18x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 25.57x | 18.36x | 15.34x | 17.75x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 13.91x | 3.20x | 6.30x | 2.18x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.94x | — | 2.47x | 2.77x | 1.47x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 31.41x | 28.16x | 8.88x | 18.56x | — | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — LEO and MSCI each lead in 3 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 $12 for ICE. LEO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.33x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs WFC's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.9% | — | +15.9% | +11.6% | +11.7% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +9.2% | +24.0% | +1.3% | +2.3% | +1.0% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -1.7% | +34.9% | +4.5% | +7.5% | +3.5% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.2% | +44.3% | +8.9% | +9.5% | +5.8% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 9 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.33x | — | 2.60x | 0.70x | 2.33x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $139M | $5.8B | $599.0B | $19.4B | $251.5B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $106,568 | $515M | $343.3B | $837M | $174.2B | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $139M | $6.3B | $942.4B | $20.3B | $425.7B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.53x | 7.67x | 0.74x | 6.53x | 0.63x | 10.70x |
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 $8,810 for LEO. Over the past 12 months, JPM leads with a +21.8% total return vs ICE's -20.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs LEO's 5.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.5% | +6.7% | -0.5% | -11.8% | -11.1% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +15.1% | +9.3% | +21.8% | -20.4% | +15.6% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +17.4% | +30.7% | +138.2% | +34.6% | +111.7% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -11.9% | +28.2% | +118.2% | +30.9% | +100.8% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.0% | +744.0% | +465.8% | +195.3% | +104.1% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +5.5% | +9.3% | +33.6% | +10.4% | +28.4% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 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. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 74.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.25x | 0.51x | 0.94x | 0.35x | 0.87x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.54 | $644.64 | $337.25 | $189.35 | $97.76 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.71 | $501.08 | $262.71 | $136.67 | $71.93 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.5% | +92.9% | +95.1% | +74.2% | +85.7% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.4 | 47.6 | 59.1 | 31.9 | 63.0 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 209K | 535K | 7.0M | 3.2M | 13.2M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — LEO and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MSCI as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", ICE as "Buy", WFC as "Hold", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 38.0% upside for ICE (target: $194) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, LEO offers the higher dividend yield at 3.76% vs MSCI's 1.20%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $688.00 | $339.75 | $194.00 | $99.38 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 27 | 61 | 36 | 60 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.8% | +1.2% | +1.9% | +1.4% | +2.0% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 12 | 15 | 13 | 4 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.24 | $7.20 | $5.95 | $1.93 | $1.69 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +5.7% | +3.9% | +1.7% | +7.2% | +0.2% |
MSCI leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). WFC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
LEO vs MSCI vs JPM vs ICE vs WFC vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LEO or MSCI or JPM or ICE or WFC or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MSCI Inc.
(MSCI) is the stronger pick with 9. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -107. 1% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO). Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) offers the better valuation at 13. 3x trailing P/E (12. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MSCI Inc. (MSCI) a "Buy" — based on 27 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 — LEO or MSCI or JPM or ICE or WFC or KO?
On trailing P/E, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) is the cheapest at 13.
3x versus MSCI Inc. at 38. 5x. On forward P/E, Wells Fargo & Company is actually cheaper at 12. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Wells Fargo & Company wins at 0. 16x 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 — LEO or MSCI or JPM or ICE or WFC or KO?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -11. 9% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSCI returned +744. 0% 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.
04Which is safer — LEO or MSCI or JPM or ICE or WFC or KO?
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, BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 33% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LEO or MSCI or JPM or ICE or WFC or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MSCI Inc.
(MSCI) is pulling ahead at 9. 7% versus -107. 1% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LEO or MSCI or JPM or ICE or WFC or KO?
BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc.
(LEO) is the more profitable company, earning 252. 7% net margin versus 17. 3% for Wells Fargo & Company — 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 20. 4% for WFC. 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.
07Is LEO or MSCI or JPM or ICE or WFC or KO 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, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 16x 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, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) trades at 12. 0x forward P/E versus 30. 5x for MSCI Inc. — 18. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 38. 0% to $194. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — LEO or MSCI or JPM or ICE or WFC or KO?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO) offers the highest yield at 3. 8%, versus 1. 2% for MSCI Inc. (MSCI).
09Is LEO or MSCI or JPM or ICE or WFC or KO 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%, WFC: +104. 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 LEO and MSCI and JPM and ICE and WFC and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (LEO (Financial Services) and MSCI (Financial Services) and JPM (Financial Services) and ICE (Financial Services) and WFC (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LEO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MSCI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; WFC is a large-cap deep-value stock; KO is a large-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.