Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
PGC vs OCFC vs JPM vs FIS vs ICE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Diversified
Information Technology Services
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
PGC vs OCFC vs JPM vs FIS vs ICE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Diversified | Information Technology Services | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges |
| Market Cap | $819M | $1.07B | $896.00B | $20.26B | $79.60B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $441M | $660M | $280.33B | $11.66B | $12.64B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $37M | $71M | $57.05B | $2.67B | $3.30B |
| Gross Margin | 58.1% | 54.8% | 60.0% | 37.6% | 61.9% |
| Operating Margin | 11.9% | 14.0% | 25.9% | 17.9% | 38.7% |
| Forward P/E | 12.5x | 9.7x | 14.4x | 6.2x | 17.3x |
| Total Debt | $260M | $1.63B | $942.38B | $4.01B | $20.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $9M | $135M | $343.34B | $599M | $837M |
PGC vs OCFC vs JPM vs FIS vs ICE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Peapack-Gladstone F… (PGC) | 100 | 246.9 | +146.9% |
| OceanFirst Financia… (OCFC) | 100 | 105.5 | +5.5% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 29.2 | -70.8% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 153.4 | +53.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PGC vs OCFC vs JPM vs FIS vs ICE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PGC has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and bank quality.
- Rev growth 9.5%, EPS growth 14.1%
- NIM 2.7% vs JPM's 2.2%
- 9.5% NII/revenue growth vs OCFC's -4.7%
- +64.7% vs FIS's -49.4%
OCFC is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 4.5% yield, vs JPM's 1.9%
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs ICE's 195.3%
FIS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.61, yield 4.2%
- PEG 0.26 vs OCFC's 3.48
- Lower P/E (6.2x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.26 vs 1.95
- 7.5% ROA vs PGC's 0.5%, ROIC 6.0% vs 4.6%
ICE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.35, Low D/E 69.9%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.35, yield 1.4%, current ratio 1.02x
- 26.1% margin vs PGC's 8.5%
- Beta 0.35 vs JPM's 0.94, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.5% NII/revenue growth vs OCFC's -4.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.2x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.26 vs 1.95 | |
| Quality / Margins | 26.1% margin vs PGC's 8.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs JPM's 0.94, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.5% yield, vs JPM's 1.9% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +64.7% vs FIS's -49.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.5% ROA vs PGC's 0.5%, ROIC 6.0% vs 4.6% |
PGC vs OCFC vs JPM vs FIS vs ICE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
PGC vs OCFC vs JPM vs FIS vs ICE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ICE leads in 1 of 6 categories
FIS leads 1 • JPM leads 1 • PGC leads 0 • OCFC leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE 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 — 635.2x PGC's $441M. ICE is the more profitable business, keeping 26.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PGC's 8.5%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $441M | $660M | $280.3B | $11.7B | $12.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $63M | $103M | $81.4B | $4.1B | $6.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $37M | $71M | $57.0B | $2.7B | $3.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $15M | $80M | $100.9B | $2.8B | $4.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +58.1% | +54.8% | +60.0% | +37.6% | +61.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.9% | +14.0% | +25.9% | +17.9% | +38.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +8.5% | +10.7% | +20.4% | +22.9% | +26.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +3.3% | +12.0% | +36.0% | +23.9% | +33.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +30.1% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +32.7% | -36.1% | +16.0% | +30.6% | +23.1% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — OCFC and FIS each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.9x trailing earnings, OCFC trades at a 70% valuation discount to FIS's 52.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs OCFC's 5.71x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $819M | $1.1B | $896.0B | $20.3B | $79.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $2.6B | $1.50T | $23.7B | $99.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 21.92x | 15.90x | 16.00x | 52.27x | 24.36x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.49x | 9.69x | 14.40x | 6.24x | 17.34x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.43x | 5.71x | 0.90x | 2.14x | 2.74x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 16.92x | 27.52x | 18.36x | 6.50x | 15.34x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.86x | 1.63x | 3.20x | 1.90x | 6.30x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.24x | 0.64x | 2.47x | 1.46x | 2.77x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 28.66x | 13.43x | 8.88x | 7.21x | 18.56x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FIS leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FIS delivers a 18.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $4 for OCFC. FIS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.29x 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 JPM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.8% | +4.3% | +15.9% | +18.4% | +11.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.5% | +0.5% | +1.3% | +7.5% | +2.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.6% | +2.2% | +4.5% | +6.0% | +7.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.8% | +2.7% | +8.9% | +6.6% | +9.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.40x | 0.98x | 2.60x | 0.29x | 0.70x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $251M | $1.5B | $599.0B | $3.4B | $19.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $9M | $135M | $343.3B | $599M | $837M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $260M | $1.6B | $942.4B | $4.0B | $20.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.32x | 0.33x | 0.74x | 21.16x | 6.53x |
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 $3,267 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, PGC leads with a +64.7% total return vs FIS's -49.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs FIS's -6.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +66.8% | +6.5% | -0.5% | -38.9% | -11.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +64.7% | +12.2% | +21.8% | -49.4% | -20.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +61.5% | +28.0% | +138.2% | -18.9% | +34.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +46.6% | +3.9% | +118.2% | -67.3% | +30.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +155.7% | +37.0% | +465.8% | -25.6% | +195.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +17.3% | +8.6% | +33.6% | -6.8% | +10.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PGC and ICE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ICE is the less volatile stock with a 0.35 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. PGC currently trades 99.3% from its 52-week high vs FIS's 47.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.89x | 0.89x | 0.94x | 0.61x | 0.35x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $46.57 | $20.61 | $337.25 | $82.74 | $189.35 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $24.42 | $16.09 | $262.71 | $37.91 | $136.67 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.3% | +90.2% | +95.1% | +47.4% | +74.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 70.2 | 50.1 | 59.1 | 30.8 | 31.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 116K | 776K | 7.0M | 5.6M | 3.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — OCFC and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PGC as "Buy", OCFC as "Hold", JPM as "Buy", FIS as "Buy", ICE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 60.4% upside for FIS (target: $63) vs 2.2% for OCFC (target: $19). For income investors, OCFC offers the higher dividend yield at 4.52% vs PGC's 0.43%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $49.00 | $19.00 | $339.75 | $62.88 | $194.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 8 | 61 | 37 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.4% | +4.5% | +1.9% | +4.2% | +1.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 15 | 1 | 13 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.20 | $0.84 | $5.95 | $1.63 | $1.93 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.7% | +7.7% | +3.9% | +7.0% | +1.7% |
ICE leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). FIS leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
PGC vs OCFC vs JPM vs FIS vs ICE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PGC or OCFC or JPM or FIS or ICE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) is the stronger pick with 9.
5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 7% for OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC). OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC) offers the better valuation at 15. 9x trailing P/E (9. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — PGC or OCFC or JPM or FIS or ICE?
On trailing P/E, OceanFirst Financial Corp.
(OCFC) is the cheapest at 15. 9x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 52. 3x. On forward P/E, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 2x — 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: Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. wins at 0. 26x versus OceanFirst Financial Corp. 's 3. 48x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PGC or OCFC or JPM or FIS or ICE?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -67. 3% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus FIS's -25. 6%. 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 — PGC or OCFC or JPM or FIS or ICE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 35β versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. 's 0. 94β — meaning JPM is approximately 168% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 29% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PGC or OCFC or JPM or FIS or ICE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) is pulling ahead at 9.
5% versus -4. 7% for OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. grew EPS 20. 7% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, 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 — PGC or OCFC or JPM or FIS or ICE?
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, 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 11. 9% for PGC. 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 PGC or OCFC or JPM or FIS or ICE 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, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 26x versus OceanFirst Financial Corp. 's 3. 48x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) trades at 6. 2x forward P/E versus 17. 3x for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — 11. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 60. 4% to $62. 88.
08Which pays a better dividend — PGC or OCFC or JPM or FIS or ICE?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC) offers the highest yield at 4. 5%, versus 0. 4% for Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC).
09Is PGC or OCFC or JPM or FIS 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. 35), 1. 4% yield, +195. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +195. 3%, PGC: +155. 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 PGC and OCFC and JPM and FIS and ICE?
These companies operate in different sectors (PGC (Financial Services) and OCFC (Financial Services) and JPM (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology) and ICE (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: PGC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; OCFC is a small-cap deep-value stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. OCFC, JPM, FIS, ICE pay a dividend while PGC 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.