Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NBTB vs TRMK vs IBCP vs CBSH vs HBAN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
NBTB vs TRMK vs IBCP vs CBSH vs HBAN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $2.35B | $2.64B | $699M | $7.71B | $25.63B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $867M | $1.12B | $315M | $2.14B | $12.48B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $169M | $224M | $69M | $566M | $2.21B |
| Gross Margin | 72.1% | 71.0% | 69.6% | 80.0% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 25.3% | 25.5% | 25.8% | 34.2% | 21.5% |
| Forward P/E | 10.9x | 11.5x | 9.7x | 12.8x | 11.1x |
| Total Debt | $327M | $1.12B | $117M | $3.00B | $18.48B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $185M | $668M | $52M | $803M | $1.78B |
NBTB vs TRMK vs IBCP vs CBSH vs HBAN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) | 100 | 145.6 | +45.6% |
| Trustmark Corporati… (TRMK) | 100 | 188.0 | +88.0% |
| Independent Bank Co… (IBCP) | 100 | 249.8 | +149.8% |
| Commerce Bancshares… (CBSH) | 100 | 103.9 | +3.9% |
| Huntington Bancshar… (HBAN) | 100 | 181.3 | +81.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NBTB vs TRMK vs IBCP vs CBSH vs HBAN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NBTB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 3.2%
- Rev growth 10.4%, EPS growth 12.5%
- 3.2% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs HBAN's 3.7%
TRMK has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in bank quality.
- NIM 3.4% vs HBAN's 2.7%
- 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs IBCP's -0.3%
- +32.5% vs CBSH's -13.9%
IBCP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 184.6% 10Y total return vs TRMK's 127.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.83, Low D/E 23.2%, current ratio 370.62x
- Beta 0.83, yield 3.0%, current ratio 370.62x
- Lower P/E (9.7x vs 12.8x)
CBSH is the clearest fit if your priority is stability.
- Beta 0.70 vs HBAN's 1.09
HBAN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.74 vs IBCP's 1.85
- Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBTB's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBTB's 0.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs IBCP's -0.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.7x vs 12.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBTB's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs HBAN's 1.09 | |
| Dividends | 3.2% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs HBAN's 3.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +32.5% vs CBSH's -13.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.4% vs NBTB's 0.5% |
NBTB vs TRMK vs IBCP vs CBSH vs HBAN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NBTB vs TRMK vs IBCP vs CBSH vs HBAN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IBCP leads in 3 of 6 categories
CBSH leads 1 • NBTB leads 0 • TRMK leads 0 • HBAN leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CBSH leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HBAN is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.5B annually — 39.6x IBCP's $315M. CBSH is the more profitable business, keeping 26.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to HBAN's 17.7%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $867M | $1.1B | $315M | $2.1B | $12.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $241M | $323M | $89M | $796M | $3.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $169M | $224M | $69M | $566M | $2.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $225M | $230M | $70M | $570M | $2.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +72.1% | +71.0% | +69.6% | +80.0% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +25.3% | +25.5% | +25.8% | +34.2% | +21.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +19.5% | +20.0% | +21.7% | +26.5% | +17.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +25.2% | +20.7% | +22.2% | +27.7% | +18.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +39.5% | +5.4% | +2.3% | +1.0% | -11.8% |
Valuation Metrics
IBCP leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.4x trailing earnings, IBCP trades at a 23% valuation discount to NBTB's 13.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), HBAN offers better value at 0.77x vs IBCP's 1.97x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.4B | $2.6B | $699M | $7.7B | $25.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.5B | $3.1B | $764M | $9.9B | $42.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.53x | 12.13x | 10.38x | 12.86x | 11.65x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.94x | 11.45x | 9.72x | 12.76x | 11.07x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.92x | 1.50x | 1.97x | 1.14x | 0.77x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.35x | 9.49x | 9.39x | 12.87x | 15.75x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.71x | 2.36x | 2.22x | 3.60x | 2.05x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.21x | 1.28x | 1.41x | 1.91x | 1.00x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 10.75x | 11.39x | 9.96x | 13.01x | 11.25x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IBCP leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CBSH delivers a 15.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $15 in annual profit, vs $10 for NBTB. NBTB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CBSH's 0.79x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IBCP scores 8/9 vs HBAN's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.5% | +10.8% | +14.2% | +15.3% | +10.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.1% | +1.2% | +1.3% | +1.7% | +1.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.9% | +7.1% | +10.2% | +8.4% | +5.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.4% | +3.2% | +2.6% | +2.3% | +4.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 | 8 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.17x | 0.53x | 0.23x | 0.79x | 0.76x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $142M | $448M | $65M | $2.2B | $16.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $185M | $668M | $52M | $803M | $1.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $327M | $1.1B | $117M | $3.0B | $18.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.05x | 0.75x | 0.91x | 1.97x | 0.62x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IBCP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IBCP five years ago would be worth $16,369 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,711 for CBSH. Over the past 12 months, TRMK leads with a +32.5% total return vs CBSH's -13.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IBCP at 32.1% vs CBSH's 6.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +9.3% | +15.5% | +7.2% | +1.0% | -6.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +9.0% | +32.5% | +12.6% | -13.9% | +12.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +54.1% | +118.5% | +130.6% | +20.2% | +85.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +29.9% | +47.6% | +63.7% | -12.9% | +22.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +102.2% | +127.7% | +184.6% | +103.4% | +121.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +15.5% | +29.8% | +32.1% | +6.3% | +22.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TRMK and CBSH each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CBSH is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HBAN's 1.09 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TRMK currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs CBSH's 79.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.88x | 0.92x | 0.81x | 0.67x | 1.08x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $46.92 | $45.99 | $37.39 | $66.35 | $19.46 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $39.20 | $33.39 | $29.63 | $46.99 | $14.87 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.1% | +97.6% | +90.8% | +79.1% | +83.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.3 | 56.0 | 50.6 | 61.7 | 53.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 236K | 392K | 176K | 1.2M | 24.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NBTB and CBSH and HBAN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NBTB as "Hold", TRMK as "Hold", IBCP as "Hold", CBSH as "Hold", HBAN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 25.9% upside for HBAN (target: $20) vs 1.4% for TRMK (target: $46). For income investors, HBAN offers the higher dividend yield at 3.73% vs CBSH's 2.06%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $46.00 | $45.50 | $38.00 | $58.50 | $20.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 9 | 7 | 15 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.2% | +2.2% | +3.0% | +2.1% | +3.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 12 | 1 | 11 | 12 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.43 | $0.97 | $1.03 | $1.08 | $0.60 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.4% | +3.0% | +1.8% | +2.7% | 0.0% |
IBCP leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). CBSH leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
NBTB vs TRMK vs IBCP vs CBSH vs HBAN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NBTB or TRMK or IBCP or CBSH or HBAN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is the stronger pick with 34.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 3% for Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP). Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) offers the better valuation at 10. 4x trailing P/E (9. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (HBAN) a "Buy" — based on 48 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 — NBTB or TRMK or IBCP or CBSH or HBAN?
On trailing P/E, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) is the cheapest at 10.
4x versus NBT Bancorp Inc. at 13. 5x. On forward P/E, Independent Bank Corporation is actually cheaper at 9. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Huntington Bancshares Incorporated wins at 0. 74x versus Independent Bank Corporation's 1. 85x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NBTB or TRMK or IBCP or CBSH or HBAN?
Over the past 5 years, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) delivered a total return of +63.
7%, compared to -12. 9% for Commerce Bancshares, Inc. (CBSH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IBCP returned +188. 6% versus CBSH's +101. 4%. 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 — NBTB or TRMK or IBCP or CBSH or HBAN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Commerce Bancshares, Inc.
(CBSH) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 67β versus Huntington Bancshares Incorporated's 1. 08β — meaning HBAN is approximately 61% more volatile than CBSH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 79% for Commerce Bancshares, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NBTB or TRMK or IBCP or CBSH or HBAN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is pulling ahead at 34.
8% versus -0. 3% for Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Huntington Bancshares Incorporated grew EPS 13. 9% year-over-year, compared to 1. 9% for Trustmark 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 — NBTB or TRMK or IBCP or CBSH or HBAN?
Commerce Bancshares, Inc.
(CBSH) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 5% net margin versus 17. 7% for Huntington Bancshares Incorporated — meaning it keeps 26. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CBSH leads at 34. 2% versus 21. 5% for HBAN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CBSH leads at 80. 0%, 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 NBTB or TRMK or IBCP or CBSH or HBAN 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, Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (HBAN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 74x versus Independent Bank Corporation's 1. 85x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) trades at 9. 7x forward P/E versus 12. 8x for Commerce Bancshares, Inc. — 3. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HBAN: 25. 9% to $20. 38.
08Which pays a better dividend — NBTB or TRMK or IBCP or CBSH or HBAN?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (HBAN) offers the highest yield at 3. 7%, versus 2. 1% for Commerce Bancshares, Inc. (CBSH).
09Is NBTB or TRMK or IBCP or CBSH or HBAN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Commerce Bancshares, Inc.
(CBSH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 67), 2. 1% yield, +101. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CBSH: +101. 4%, HBAN: +120. 7%), 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 NBTB and TRMK and IBCP and CBSH and HBAN?
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: NBTB is a small-cap deep-value stock; TRMK is a small-cap high-growth stock; IBCP is a small-cap deep-value stock; CBSH is a small-cap deep-value stock; HBAN is a mid-cap deep-value 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.