Financial - Capital Markets
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC vs C
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Diversified
MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC vs C — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $307.53B | $291.19B | $849.03B | $407.94B | $222.93B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $103.14B | $126.85B | $270.79B | $188.75B | $170.71B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $16.18B | $16.67B | $58.03B | $30.63B | $14.69B |
| Gross Margin | 55.6% | 41.1% | 58.6% | 55.4% | 41.7% |
| Operating Margin | 17.1% | 14.5% | 27.7% | 18.5% | 10.0% |
| Forward P/E | 16.3x | 15.8x | 14.2x | 12.1x | 11.8x |
| Total Debt | $360.49B | $616.93B | $751.15B | $365.90B | $590.56B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $75.74B | $182.09B | $469.32B | $231.84B | $276.53B |
MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC vs C — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 437.3 | +337.3% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 477.0 | +377.0% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 323.6 | +223.6% |
| Bank of America Cor… (BAC) | 100 | 222.2 | +122.2% |
| Citigroup Inc. (C) | 100 | 266.3 | +166.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC vs C
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MS is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 7.4% 10Y total return vs GS's 5.4%
GS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 17.0%, EPS growth 77.3%
- 17.0% NII/revenue growth vs BAC's -1.9%
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4%
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 2.3% vs GS's 0.5%
BAC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 6 yrs, beta 1.00, yield 2.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.00, current ratio 0.42x
- PEG 0.78 vs MS's 1.83
- Beta 1.00, yield 2.4%, current ratio 0.42x
C ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value and momentum.
- Lower P/E (11.8x vs 14.2x)
- +87.1% vs JPM's +28.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 17.0% NII/revenue growth vs BAC's -1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.8x vs 14.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.00 vs C's 1.51, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.4% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +87.1% vs JPM's +28.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4% |
MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC vs C — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC vs C — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
C leads 1 • GS leads 1 • MS leads 0 • BAC leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $270.8B annually — 2.6x MS's $103.1B. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 21.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to C's 7.4%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $103.1B | $126.9B | $270.8B | $188.8B | $170.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $26.3B | $23.4B | $81.3B | $36.6B | $24.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $16.2B | $16.7B | $58.0B | $30.6B | $14.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$6.7B | $15.8B | -$119.7B | $12.6B | -$76.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +55.6% | +41.1% | +58.6% | +55.4% | +41.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +17.1% | +14.5% | +27.7% | +18.5% | +10.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +13.0% | +11.3% | +21.6% | +16.2% | +7.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.0% | -12.1% | -15.5% | +6.7% | -15.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +48.9% | +45.8% | +16.0% | +18.3% | +23.2% |
Valuation Metrics
C leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.0x trailing earnings, BAC trades at a 42% valuation discount to MS's 24.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BAC offers better value at 0.91x vs MS's 2.73x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $307.5B | $291.2B | $849.0B | $407.9B | $222.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $592.3B | $726.0B | $1.13T | $542.0B | $537.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 24.31x | 23.12x | 15.94x | 14.03x | 21.44x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 16.28x | 15.84x | 14.17x | 12.05x | 11.80x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.73x | 1.65x | 1.23x | 0.91x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 26.03x | 34.92x | 13.62x | 14.80x | 25.14x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.98x | 2.30x | 3.14x | 2.16x | 1.31x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.95x | 2.56x | 2.63x | 1.33x | 1.16x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 32.34x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 16.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $7 for C. BAC carries lower financial leverage with a 1.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 5.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BAC scores 7/9 vs GS's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +14.6% | +12.6% | +16.1% | +10.1% | +6.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.2% | +0.9% | +1.3% | +0.9% | +0.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.9% | +1.9% | +5.4% | +3.2% | +1.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.8% | +3.6% | +8.2% | +4.2% | +3.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.42x | 5.06x | 2.18x | 1.21x | 2.82x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $284.7B | $434.8B | $281.8B | $134.1B | $314.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $75.7B | $182.1B | $469.3B | $231.8B | $276.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $360.5B | $616.9B | $751.1B | $365.9B | $590.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.44x | 0.31x | 0.74x | 0.44x | 0.24x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $27,109 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,887 for BAC. Over the past 12 months, C leads with a +87.1% total return vs JPM's +28.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 44.0% vs BAC's 27.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.4% | +3.0% | -2.3% | -3.7% | +8.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +66.7% | +73.4% | +28.7% | +33.9% | +87.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +142.1% | +198.7% | +140.8% | +104.6% | +189.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +142.2% | +171.1% | +110.3% | +38.9% | +85.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +739.4% | +536.1% | +471.7% | +332.5% | +229.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +34.3% | +44.0% | +34.0% | +27.0% | +42.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MS and BAC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BAC is the less volatile stock with a 1.00 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than C's 1.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MS currently trades 99.2% from its 52-week high vs BAC's 93.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.37x | 1.47x | 1.00x | 1.00x | 1.51x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $194.83 | $984.70 | $337.25 | $57.55 | $135.29 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $117.21 | $547.06 | $248.83 | $40.56 | $69.17 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.2% | +95.2% | +93.4% | +93.1% | +94.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.2 | 55.0 | 53.4 | 57.1 | 58.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.4M | 2.0M | 8.4M | 36.3M | 11.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — JPM and BAC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MS as "Buy", GS as "Hold", JPM as "Buy", BAC as "Buy", C as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 14.0% upside for BAC (target: $61) vs 6.2% for GS (target: $996). For income investors, BAC offers the higher dividend yield at 2.36% vs GS's 1.44%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $205.75 | $995.89 | $338.78 | $61.13 | $140.42 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 52 | 55 | 61 | 54 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.0% | +1.4% | +1.6% | +2.4% | +2.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 11 | 12 | 14 | 6 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $3.81 | $13.48 | $5.13 | $1.27 | $2.73 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | +3.5% | +3.4% | +5.3% | +3.4% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). C leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC vs C: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MS or GS or JPM or BAC or C a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is the stronger pick with 17. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 9% for Bank of America Corporation (BAC). Bank of America Corporation (BAC) offers the better valuation at 14. 0x trailing P/E (12. 1x 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.
02Which has the better valuation — MS or GS or JPM or BAC or C?
On trailing P/E, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the cheapest at 14.
0x versus Morgan Stanley at 24. 3x. On forward P/E, Citigroup Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 8x — 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: Bank of America Corporation wins at 0. 78x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 83x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MS or GS or JPM or BAC or C?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) delivered a total return of +171. 1%, compared to +38. 9% for Bank of America Corporation (BAC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +739. 4% versus C's +229. 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 — MS or GS or JPM or BAC or C?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
00β versus Citigroup Inc. 's 1. 51β — meaning C is approximately 52% more volatile than BAC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 121% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MS or GS or JPM or BAC or C?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is pulling ahead at 17. 0% versus -1. 9% for Bank of America Corporation (BAC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to 18. 6% for Bank of America Corporation. 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 — MS or GS or JPM or BAC or C?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 21. 6% net margin versus 7. 4% for Citigroup Inc. — meaning it keeps 21. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 27. 7% versus 10. 0% for C. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JPM leads at 58. 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 MS or GS or JPM or BAC or C 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, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 78x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 83x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Citigroup Inc. (C) trades at 11. 8x forward P/E versus 16. 3x for Morgan Stanley — 4. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BAC: 14. 0% to $61. 13.
08Which pays a better dividend — MS or GS or JPM or BAC or C?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Bank of America Corporation (BAC) offers the highest yield at 2. 4%, versus 1. 4% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS).
09Is MS or GS or JPM or BAC or C better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 00), 1. 6% yield, +471. 7% 10Y return). Citigroup Inc. (C) carries a higher beta of 1. 51 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +471. 7%, C: +229. 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 MS and GS and JPM and BAC and C?
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: MS is a large-cap high-growth stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; BAC is a large-cap deep-value stock; C 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.
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.