Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
PLBC vs HAFC vs KO vs CVBF vs WAFD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
PLBC vs HAFC vs KO vs CVBF vs WAFD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $398M | $949M | $355.61B | $2.88B | $2.85B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $112M | $444M | $49.28B | $644M | $1.39B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $30M | $76M | $13.70B | $209M | $243M |
| Gross Margin | 81.5% | 57.4% | 61.7% | 79.7% | 52.8% |
| Operating Margin | 35.4% | 24.3% | 29.3% | 43.7% | 22.4% |
| Forward P/E | 10.1x | 10.0x | 25.3x | 14.7x | 11.4x |
| Total Debt | $148M | $280M | $45.49B | $991M | $1.82B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $81M | $213M | $10.27B | $108M | $657M |
PLBC vs HAFC vs KO vs CVBF vs WAFD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plumas Bancorp (PLBC) | 100 | 255.9 | +155.9% |
| Hanmi Financial Cor… (HAFC) | 100 | 327.0 | +227.0% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) | 100 | 113.3 | +13.3% |
| WaFd, Inc. (WAFD) | 100 | 138.1 | +38.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PLBC vs HAFC vs KO vs CVBF vs WAFD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PLBC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and bank quality.
- 5.7% 10Y total return vs KO's 121.1%
- NIM 4.0% vs WAFD's 2.5%
- 48.6% NII/revenue growth vs CVBF's -2.3%
HAFC has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 3.5%, EPS growth 22.4%
- PEG 0.79 vs CVBF's 4.64
- Lower P/E (10.0x vs 14.7x), PEG 0.79 vs 4.64
- +39.4% vs CVBF's +16.3%
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- 13.1% ROA vs WAFD's 0.9%, ROIC 15.8% vs 3.9%
CVBF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and dividends is your priority.
- 32.5% margin vs HAFC's 17.1%
- 3.8% yield, vs KO's 2.5%
WAFD is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 16 yrs, beta 0.66, yield 2.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.66, Low D/E 59.8%, current ratio 0.15x
- Beta 0.66, yield 2.8%, current ratio 0.15x
- Beta 0.66 vs HAFC's 0.82
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 48.6% NII/revenue growth vs CVBF's -2.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.0x vs 14.7x), PEG 0.79 vs 4.64 | |
| Quality / Margins | 32.5% margin vs HAFC's 17.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.66 vs HAFC's 0.82 | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, vs KO's 2.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +39.4% vs CVBF's +16.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs WAFD's 0.9%, ROIC 15.8% vs 3.9% |
PLBC vs HAFC vs KO vs CVBF vs WAFD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
PLBC vs HAFC vs KO vs CVBF vs WAFD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CVBF leads in 1 of 6 categories
HAFC leads 1 • KO leads 1 • PLBC leads 0 • WAFD leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CVBF leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 440.1x PLBC's $112M. CVBF is the more profitable business, keeping 32.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to HAFC's 17.1%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $112M | $444M | $49.3B | $644M | $1.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $41M | $110M | $15.5B | $294M | $277M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $30M | $76M | $13.7B | $209M | $243M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $20M | $204M | $12.6B | $217M | $215M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +81.5% | +57.4% | +61.7% | +79.7% | +52.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +35.4% | +24.3% | +29.3% | +43.7% | +22.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +26.4% | +17.1% | +27.8% | +32.5% | +17.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +18.1% | +45.8% | +25.5% | +33.7% | +15.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +12.1% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +20.9% | +20.7% | +18.2% | +11.1% | +46.3% |
Valuation Metrics
HAFC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.5x trailing earnings, PLBC trades at a 54% valuation discount to KO's 27.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), HAFC offers better value at 1.00x vs WAFD's 4.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $398M | $949M | $355.6B | $2.9B | $2.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $466M | $1.0B | $390.8B | $3.8B | $4.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.47x | 12.65x | 27.18x | 13.97x | 14.10x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.06x | 10.05x | 25.27x | 14.74x | 11.35x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.20x | 1.00x | 2.43x | 4.40x | 4.58x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.76x | 8.95x | 26.39x | 13.37x | 13.41x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.68x | 2.13x | 7.42x | 4.48x | 2.02x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.41x | 1.20x | 10.40x | 1.26x | 0.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 19.64x | 4.66x | 67.15x | 13.26x | 13.71x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $8 for WAFD. HAFC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.35x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HAFC scores 9/9 vs PLBC's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.3% | +9.8% | +41.1% | +9.3% | +8.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.5% | +1.0% | +13.1% | +1.4% | +0.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.2% | +7.4% | +15.8% | +6.8% | +3.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +14.1% | +2.5% | +17.3% | +9.3% | +5.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.57x | 0.35x | 1.33x | 0.43x | 0.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $67M | $68M | $35.2B | $883M | $1.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $81M | $213M | $10.3B | $108M | $657M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $148M | $280M | $45.5B | $991M | $1.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.85x | 0.62x | 10.70x | 2.12x | 0.48x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — PLBC and HAFC each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PLBC five years ago would be worth $21,015 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,522 for CVBF. Over the past 12 months, HAFC leads with a +39.4% total return vs CVBF's +16.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HAFC at 29.3% vs WAFD's 11.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +30.3% | +20.3% | +20.3% | +14.8% | +17.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +31.1% | +39.4% | +17.2% | +16.3% | +32.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +62.0% | +116.0% | +47.0% | +64.4% | +37.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +110.2% | +80.5% | +65.6% | +15.2% | +29.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +574.9% | +73.3% | +121.1% | +66.9% | +91.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +17.5% | +29.3% | +13.7% | +18.0% | +11.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — KO and WAFD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HAFC's 0.82 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.71x | 0.82x | -0.20x | 0.81x | 0.66x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $57.00 | $31.87 | $84.04 | $21.48 | $37.10 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $39.70 | $22.00 | $65.35 | $17.95 | $26.31 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.3% | +99.6% | +98.3% | +98.8% | +99.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 70.4 | 62.5 | 60.6 | 60.1 | 63.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 56K | 203K | 12.7M | 1.6M | 525K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KO and CVBF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PLBC as "Buy", HAFC as "Hold", KO as "Buy", CVBF as "Hold", WAFD as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 16.6% upside for CVBF (target: $25) vs -5.6% for WAFD (target: $35). For income investors, CVBF offers the higher dividend yield at 3.85% vs PLBC's 2.09%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $61.50 | $33.50 | $86.13 | $24.75 | $35.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 3 | 11 | 48 | 16 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.1% | +3.4% | +2.5% | +3.8% | +2.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 5 | 1 | 56 | 0 | 16 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.18 | $1.09 | $2.04 | $0.82 | $1.05 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.0% | +0.2% | +2.8% | +3.6% |
CVBF leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). HAFC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
PLBC vs HAFC vs KO vs CVBF vs WAFD: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PLBC or HAFC or KO or CVBF or WAFD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Plumas Bancorp (PLBC) is the stronger pick with 48.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 3% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). Plumas Bancorp (PLBC) offers the better valuation at 12. 5x trailing P/E (10. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Plumas Bancorp (PLBC) a "Buy" — based on 3 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 — PLBC or HAFC or KO or CVBF or WAFD?
On trailing P/E, Plumas Bancorp (PLBC) is the cheapest at 12.
5x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, Hanmi Financial Corporation is actually cheaper at 10. 0x — 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: Hanmi Financial Corporation wins at 0. 79x versus CVB Financial Corp. 's 4. 64x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PLBC or HAFC or KO or CVBF or WAFD?
Over the past 5 years, Plumas Bancorp (PLBC) delivered a total return of +110.
2%, compared to +15. 2% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PLBC returned +574. 9% versus CVBF's +66. 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 — PLBC or HAFC or KO or CVBF or WAFD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Hanmi Financial Corporation's 0. 82β — meaning HAFC is approximately -510% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Hanmi Financial Corporation (HAFC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 35% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PLBC or HAFC or KO or CVBF or WAFD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Plumas Bancorp (PLBC) is pulling ahead at 48.
6% versus -2. 3% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to -5. 4% for Plumas Bancorp. 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 — PLBC or HAFC or KO or CVBF or WAFD?
CVB Financial Corp.
(CVBF) is the more profitable company, earning 32. 5% net margin versus 16. 0% for WaFd, Inc. — meaning it keeps 32. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CVBF leads at 43. 8% versus 20. 5% for WAFD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PLBC leads at 80. 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 PLBC or HAFC or KO or CVBF or WAFD 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, Hanmi Financial Corporation (HAFC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 79x versus CVB Financial Corp. 's 4. 64x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Hanmi Financial Corporation (HAFC) trades at 10. 0x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 15. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CVBF: 16. 6% to $24. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — PLBC or HAFC or KO or CVBF or WAFD?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) offers the highest yield at 3. 8%, versus 2. 1% for Plumas Bancorp (PLBC).
09Is PLBC or HAFC or KO or CVBF or WAFD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, HAFC: +73. 3%), 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 PLBC and HAFC and KO and CVBF and WAFD?
These companies operate in different sectors (PLBC (Financial Services) and HAFC (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and CVBF (Financial Services) and WAFD (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: PLBC is a small-cap high-growth stock; HAFC is a small-cap deep-value stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; CVBF is a small-cap deep-value stock; WAFD is a small-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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.