Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
MNSB vs ICE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
MNSB vs ICE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges |
| Market Cap | $176M | $88.45B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $136M | $12.64B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $16M | $3.30B |
| Gross Margin | 54.4% | 61.9% |
| Operating Margin | 14.0% | 38.7% |
| Forward P/E | 10.4x | 19.5x |
| Total Debt | $70M | $20.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $25M | $837M |
MNSB vs ICE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| MainStreet Bancshar… (MNSB) | 100 | 177.2 | +77.2% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 160.6 | +60.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MNSB vs ICE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MNSB is the clearest fit if your priority is value and momentum.
- Lower P/E (10.4x vs 19.5x)
- +26.4% vs ICE's -10.4%
ICE carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.33, yield 1.2%
- Rev growth 7.5%, EPS growth 20.7%
- 225.3% 10Y total return vs MNSB's 126.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 7.5% NII/revenue growth vs MNSB's -1.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.4x vs 19.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MNSB's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs MNSB's 0.66 | |
| Dividends | 1.2% yield; 14-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +26.4% vs ICE's -10.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MNSB's 0.4% |
MNSB vs ICE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MNSB vs ICE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.6B annually — 93.0x MNSB's $136M. ICE is the more profitable business, keeping 26.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MNSB's 11.5%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $136M | $12.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $23M | $6.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $16M | $3.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $13M | $4.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +54.4% | +61.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +14.0% | +38.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.5% | +26.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.8% | +33.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +120.9% | +23.1% |
Valuation Metrics
MNSB leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.4x trailing earnings, MNSB trades at a 51% valuation discount to ICE's 27.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, MNSB's 11.6x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ICE's 16.7x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $176M | $88.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $221M | $107.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.36x | 27.06x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.45x | 19.48x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 3.05x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.58x | 16.71x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.30x | 7.00x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.82x | 3.08x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 16.57x | 20.62x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ICE leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ICE delivers a 11.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $7 for MNSB. MNSB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.32x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ICE's 0.70x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs MNSB's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +7.3% | +11.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.7% | +2.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.0% | +7.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.9% | +9.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.32x | 0.70x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $45M | $19.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $25M | $837M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $70M | $20.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.31x | 6.53x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ICE leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ICE five years ago would be worth $14,335 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,056 for MNSB. Over the past 12 months, MNSB leads with a +26.4% total return vs ICE's -10.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ICE at 14.7% vs MNSB's 6.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +19.4% | -2.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +26.4% | -10.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +21.5% | +50.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +20.6% | +43.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +126.9% | +225.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +6.7% | +14.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MNSB and ICE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ICE is the less volatile stock with a 0.33 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MNSB's 0.66 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MNSB currently trades 93.4% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 82.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.66x | 0.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $25.17 | $189.35 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.86 | $143.17 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +93.4% | +82.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.4 | 38.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 58K | 3.0M |
Analyst Outlook
ICE leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates MNSB as "Hold" and ICE as "Buy". ICE is the only dividend payer here at 1.24% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $195.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.93 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.6% |
ICE leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MNSB leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
MNSB vs ICE: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MNSB or ICE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the stronger pick with 7. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 4% for MainStreet Bancshares, Inc. (MNSB). MainStreet Bancshares, Inc. (MNSB) offers the better valuation at 13. 4x trailing P/E (10. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) a "Buy" — based on 36 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 — MNSB or ICE?
On trailing P/E, MainStreet Bancshares, Inc.
(MNSB) is the cheapest at 13. 4x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. at 27. 1x. On forward P/E, MainStreet Bancshares, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 4x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MNSB or ICE?
Over the past 5 years, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) delivered a total return of +43. 4%, compared to +20. 6% for MainStreet Bancshares, Inc. (MNSB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ICE returned +225. 3% versus MNSB's +126. 9%. 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 — MNSB or ICE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 33β versus MainStreet Bancshares, Inc. 's 0. 66β — meaning MNSB is approximately 103% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, MainStreet Bancshares, Inc. (MNSB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 32% versus 70% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MNSB or ICE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is pulling ahead at 7. 5% versus -1. 4% for MainStreet Bancshares, Inc. (MNSB). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MainStreet Bancshares, Inc. grew EPS 210. 0% year-over-year, compared to 20. 7% for Intercontinental Exchange, 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 — MNSB or ICE?
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus 11. 5% for MainStreet Bancshares, Inc. — meaning it keeps 26. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus 14. 0% for MNSB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ICE leads at 61. 9%, 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 MNSB or ICE more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, MainStreet Bancshares, Inc.
(MNSB) trades at 10. 4x forward P/E versus 19. 5x for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — 9. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.
08Which pays a better dividend — MNSB or ICE?
In this comparison, ICE (1.
2% yield) pays a dividend. MNSB does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MNSB 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. 33), 1. 2% yield, +225. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +225. 3%, MNSB: +126. 9%), 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 MNSB 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: MNSB is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. ICE pays a dividend while MNSB does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.