Financial - Capital Markets
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
NMR vs DB vs MS vs UBS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Financial - Capital Markets
Banks - Diversified
NMR vs DB vs MS vs UBS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Capital Markets | Banks - Regional | Financial - Capital Markets | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $22.85B | $60.21B | $302.59B | $137.82B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.76T | $60.86B | $103.14B | $59.05B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $370.05B | $6.93B | $16.18B | $6.27B |
| Gross Margin | 45.6% | 49.9% | 55.6% | 63.6% |
| Operating Margin | 11.3% | 16.0% | 17.1% | 11.9% |
| Forward P/E | 9.7x | 9.3x | 16.0x | 13.6x |
| Total Debt | $17.30T | $254.81B | $360.49B | $356.12B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4.30T | $171.62B | $75.74B | $209.86B |
NMR vs DB vs MS vs UBS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nomura Holdings, In… (NMR) | 100 | 185.8 | +85.8% |
| Deutsche Bank AG (DB) | 100 | 374.6 | +274.6% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 430.3 | +330.3% |
| UBS Group AG (UBS) | 100 | 415.0 | +315.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NMR vs DB vs MS vs UBS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NMR is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.32, current ratio 1.43x
- Beta 1.32, yield 4.8%, current ratio 1.43x
- 4.8% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs MS's 2.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
DB carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for valuation efficiency and bank quality.
- PEG 0.08 vs UBS's 12.29
- NIM 1.1% vs UBS's 0.4%
- Lower P/E (9.3x vs 13.6x), PEG 0.08 vs 12.29
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs UBS's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
MS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 1.37, yield 2.0%
- Rev growth 16.8%, EPS growth 53.5%
- 7.3% 10Y total return vs UBS's 232.0%
- 16.8% NII/revenue growth vs UBS's -20.4%
UBS is the clearest fit if your priority is stability.
- Beta 1.17 vs DB's 1.48
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.8% NII/revenue growth vs UBS's -20.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.3x vs 13.6x), PEG 0.08 vs 12.29 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs UBS's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.17 vs DB's 1.48 | |
| Dividends | 4.8% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs MS's 2.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +63.0% vs DB's +20.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs UBS's 0.5% |
NMR vs DB vs MS vs UBS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
NMR vs DB vs MS vs UBS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MS leads in 3 of 6 categories
DB leads 1 • NMR leads 0 • UBS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MS leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NMR is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.76T annually — 80.6x UBS's $59.1B. MS is the more profitable business, keeping 13.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NMR's 7.6%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.76T | $60.9B | $103.1B | $59.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $533.0B | $9.7B | $26.3B | $9.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $370.1B | $6.9B | $16.2B | $6.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | $0 | -$6.7B | $3.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +45.6% | +49.9% | +55.6% | +63.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.3% | +16.0% | +17.1% | +11.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +7.6% | +11.4% | +13.0% | +10.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -25.2% | — | -2.0% | -26.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.5% | +3.3% | +48.9% | +26.1% |
Valuation Metrics
DB leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.7x trailing earnings, DB trades at a 64% valuation discount to MS's 23.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), DB offers better value at 0.08x vs UBS's 21.49x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $22.9B | $60.2B | $302.6B | $137.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $106.0B | $158.0B | $587.3B | $284.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 10.40x | 8.67x | 23.92x | 23.75x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.69x | 9.35x | 16.01x | 13.59x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.53x | 0.08x | 2.69x | 21.49x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 27.25x | 13.83x | 25.81x | 29.75x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.75x | 0.84x | 2.93x | 2.33x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.98x | 0.67x | 2.91x | 1.62x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
MS leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MS delivers a 14.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $15 in annual profit, vs $7 for UBS. DB carries lower financial leverage with a 3.18x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NMR's 4.49x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), UBS scores 6/9 vs MS's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.2% | +8.7% | +14.6% | +7.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.6% | +0.5% | +1.2% | +0.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.4% | +2.6% | +2.9% | +1.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.4% | +1.9% | +3.8% | +1.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 4.49x | 3.18x | 3.42x | 3.94x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $13.00T | $83.2B | $284.7B | $146.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4.30T | $171.6B | $75.7B | $209.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $17.30T | $254.8B | $360.5B | $356.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.20x | 0.34x | 0.44x | 0.33x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in UBS five years ago would be worth $30,472 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $16,851 for NMR. Over the past 12 months, MS leads with a +63.0% total return vs DB's +20.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors DB at 45.9% vs MS's 33.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -6.3% | -20.5% | +5.7% | -3.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +47.1% | +20.9% | +63.0% | +47.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +145.2% | +210.4% | +138.4% | +139.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +68.5% | +135.3% | +136.2% | +204.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +141.5% | +101.7% | +732.3% | +232.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +34.8% | +45.9% | +33.6% | +33.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MS and UBS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
UBS is the less volatile stock with a 1.17 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than DB's 1.48 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MS currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs DB's 77.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.32x | 1.48x | 1.37x | 1.17x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.58 | $40.43 | $194.83 | $49.36 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.48 | $26.59 | $118.20 | $30.36 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.6% | +77.8% | +97.6% | +90.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.7 | 52.5 | 66.0 | 68.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.1M | 3.5M | 5.4M | 2.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NMR and MS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NMR as "Hold", DB as "Hold", MS as "Buy", UBS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 8.2% upside for MS (target: $206) vs -52.7% for DB (target: $15). For income investors, NMR offers the higher dividend yield at 4.77% vs UBS's 1.62%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $5.79 | $14.87 | $205.75 | $23.57 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 9 | 33 | 52 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +4.8% | — | +2.0% | +1.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 4 | 11 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $59.06 | — | $3.81 | $0.72 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.8% | 0.0% | +1.4% | +3.1% |
MS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). DB leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
NMR vs DB vs MS vs UBS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NMR or DB or MS or UBS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger pick with 16.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -20. 4% for UBS Group AG (UBS). Deutsche Bank AG (DB) offers the better valuation at 8. 7x trailing P/E (9. 3x 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 — NMR or DB or MS or UBS?
On trailing P/E, Deutsche Bank AG (DB) is the cheapest at 8.
7x versus Morgan Stanley at 23. 9x. On forward P/E, Deutsche Bank AG is actually cheaper at 9. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Deutsche Bank AG wins at 0. 08x versus UBS Group AG's 12. 29x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NMR or DB or MS or UBS?
Over the past 5 years, UBS Group AG (UBS) delivered a total return of +204.
7%, compared to +68. 5% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +732. 3% versus DB's +101. 7%. 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 — NMR or DB or MS or UBS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), UBS Group AG (UBS) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
17β versus Deutsche Bank AG's 1. 48β — meaning DB is approximately 26% more volatile than UBS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Deutsche Bank AG (DB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 4% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NMR or DB or MS or UBS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Morgan Stanley (MS) is pulling ahead at 16.
8% versus -20. 4% for UBS Group AG (UBS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Deutsche Bank AG grew EPS 125. 5% year-over-year, compared to 7. 2% for Nomura Holdings, 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 — NMR or DB or MS or UBS?
Morgan Stanley (MS) is the more profitable company, earning 13.
0% net margin versus 7. 6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 13. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MS leads at 17. 1% versus 11. 3% for NMR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UBS leads at 63. 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 NMR or DB or MS or UBS 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, Deutsche Bank AG (DB) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 08x versus UBS Group AG's 12. 29x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Deutsche Bank AG (DB) trades at 9. 3x forward P/E versus 16. 0x for Morgan Stanley — 6. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MS: 8. 2% to $205. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — NMR or DB or MS or UBS?
In this comparison, NMR (4.
8% yield), MS (2. 0% yield), UBS (1. 6% yield) pay a dividend. DB does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NMR or DB or MS or UBS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (2.
0% yield, +732. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MS: +732. 3%, DB: +101. 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 NMR and DB and MS and UBS?
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: NMR is a mid-cap deep-value stock; DB is a mid-cap deep-value stock; MS is a large-cap high-growth stock; UBS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. NMR, MS, UBS pay a dividend while DB 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.