Compare Stocks

4 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

PRK vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
PRK
Park National Corporation

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesAMEX • US
Market Cap$3.16B
5Y Perf.+131.4%
FULT
Fulton Financial Corporation

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$4.13B
5Y Perf.+91.8%
IBCP
Independent Bank Corporation

Banks - Regional

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$699M
5Y Perf.+149.8%
FIS
Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.

Information Technology Services

TechnologyNYSE • US
Market Cap$24.47B
5Y Perf.-68.7%

PRK vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
PRK logoPRK
FULT logoFULT
IBCP logoIBCP
FIS logoFIS
IndustryBanks - RegionalBanks - RegionalBanks - RegionalInformation Technology Services
Market Cap$3.16B$4.13B$699M$24.47B
Revenue (TTM)$664M$1.89B$315M$10.89B
Net Income (TTM)$180M$392M$69M$382M
Gross Margin82.1%67.4%69.6%38.1%
Operating Margin33.3%25.7%25.8%17.5%
Forward P/E13.9x10.6x9.7x7.5x
Total Debt$99M$1.30B$117M$4.01B
Cash & Equiv.$137M$271M$52M$599M

PRK vs FULT vs IBCP vs FISLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

PRK
FULT
IBCP
FIS
StockMay 20May 26Return
Park National Corpo… (PRK)100231.4+131.4%
Fulton Financial Co… (FULT)100191.8+91.8%
Independent Bank Co… (IBCP)100249.8+149.8%
Fidelity National I… (FIS)10031.3-68.7%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: PRK vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: FIS leads in 3 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and valuation and capital efficiency. Park National Corporation is the stronger pick specifically for profitability and margin quality and operational efficiency and capital deployment. FULT also leads in specific categories worth noting. This set spans 2 sectors — these stocks serve different portfolio roles, not just different price points.
PRK
Park National Corporation
The Banking Pick

PRK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and bank quality is your priority.

  • Lower volatility, beta 0.82, Low D/E 7.3%, current ratio 2.04x
  • NIM 4.5% vs FULT's 3.2%
  • 27.1% margin vs FIS's 3.5%
  • 1.8% ROA vs FIS's 1.1%, ROIC 11.1% vs 6.0%
Best for: sleep-well-at-night and bank quality
FULT
Fulton Financial Corporation
The Banking Pick

FULT is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.

  • Rev growth 5.0%, EPS growth 32.5%
  • 3.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs IBCP's 3.0%
  • +29.6% vs FIS's -35.3%
Best for: growth exposure
IBCP
Independent Bank Corporation
The Banking Pick

IBCP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.

  • 184.6% 10Y total return vs PRK's 143.0%
Best for: long-term compounding
FIS
Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.
The Income Pick

FIS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and valuation efficiency.

  • Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.76, yield 3.5%
  • PEG 0.31 vs PRK's 1.90
  • Beta 0.76, yield 3.5%, current ratio 0.59x
  • 5.4% revenue growth vs IBCP's -0.3%
Best for: income & stability and valuation efficiency
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthFIS logoFIS5.4% revenue growth vs IBCP's -0.3%
ValueFIS logoFISLower P/E (7.5x vs 13.9x), PEG 0.31 vs 1.90
Quality / MarginsPRK logoPRK27.1% margin vs FIS's 3.5%
Stability / SafetyFIS logoFISBeta 0.76 vs FULT's 1.13, lower leverage
DividendsFULT logoFULT3.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs IBCP's 3.0%
Momentum (1Y)FULT logoFULT+29.6% vs FIS's -35.3%
Efficiency (ROA)PRK logoPRK1.8% ROA vs FIS's 1.1%, ROIC 11.1% vs 6.0%

PRK vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

PRKPark National Corporation
FY 2025
Fiduciary and Trust
65.1%$46M
Bank Servicing
20.6%$14M
Deposit Account
14.3%$10M
FULTFulton Financial Corporation
FY 2024
Financial Service, Other
32.8%$85M
Fiduciary and Trust
32.7%$85M
Deposit Account
21.4%$56M
Service, Other
7.7%$20M
Mortgage Banking
5.4%$14M
IBCPIndependent Bank Corporation
FY 2021
Interchange Income
32.5%$14M
Service Charges on Deposits
23.5%$10M
Overdraft Fees
19.5%$8M
Investment and Insurance Commissions
6.0%$3M
Other Deposit Related Income
5.3%$2M
Asset Management Revenue
3.9%$2M
Account Service Charges
2.6%$1M
Other (3)
6.6%$3M
FISFidelity National Information Services, Inc.
FY 2025
Banking Solutions
69.5%$7.3B
Capital Market Solutions
30.5%$3.2B

PRK vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLPRKLAGGINGFIS

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

PRK leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.

FIS is the larger business by revenue, generating $10.9B annually — 34.5x IBCP's $315M. PRK is the more profitable business, keeping 27.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FIS's 3.5%.

MetricPRK logoPRKPark National Cor…FULT logoFULTFulton Financial …IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …FIS logoFISFidelity National…
RevenueTrailing 12 months$664M$1.9B$315M$10.9B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$230M$529M$89M$3.8B
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$180M$392M$69M$382M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$192M$267M$70M$2.8B
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+82.1%+67.4%+69.6%+38.1%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+33.3%+25.7%+25.8%+17.5%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+27.1%+20.7%+21.7%+3.5%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+28.9%+15.0%+22.2%+26.1%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+8.2%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+10.5%+47.2%+2.3%+92.3%
PRK leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

FULT leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 10.3x trailing earnings, FULT trades at a 84% valuation discount to FIS's 63.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FULT offers better value at 0.74x vs FIS's 2.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricPRK logoPRKPark National Cor…FULT logoFULTFulton Financial …IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …FIS logoFISFidelity National…
Market CapShares × price$3.2B$4.1B$699M$24.5B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$3.1B$5.2B$764M$27.9B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS15.73x10.31x10.38x63.00x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.13.94x10.61x9.72x7.54x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate2.15x0.74x1.97x2.58x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple13.57x9.74x9.39x7.66x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue4.75x2.18x2.22x2.29x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share2.09x1.13x1.41x1.76x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF16.45x14.52x9.96x9.97x
FULT leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

PRK leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.

IBCP delivers a 14.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $3 for FIS. PRK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FULT's 0.37x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PRK scores 9/9 vs FIS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricPRK logoPRKPark National Cor…FULT logoFULTFulton Financial …IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …FIS logoFISFidelity National…
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+13.7%+11.6%+14.2%+2.7%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+1.8%+1.2%+1.3%+1.1%
ROICReturn on invested capital+11.1%+7.5%+10.2%+6.0%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+3.9%+9.5%+2.6%+6.6%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–99686
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage0.07x0.37x0.23x0.29x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash-$38M$1.0B$65M$3.4B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$137M$271M$52M$599M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$99M$1.3B$117M$4.0B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense2.06x0.84x0.91x4.64x
PRK leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

IBCP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in IBCP five years ago would be worth $16,369 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,685 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, FULT leads with a +29.6% total return vs FIS's -35.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IBCP at 32.1% vs FIS's -2.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricPRK logoPRKPark National Cor…FULT logoFULTFulton Financial …IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …FIS logoFISFidelity National…
YTD ReturnYear-to-date+14.0%+11.1%+7.2%-27.3%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+14.4%+29.6%+12.6%-35.3%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+84.8%+130.4%+130.6%-6.6%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+54.0%+41.4%+63.7%-63.2%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+143.0%+106.1%+184.6%-13.2%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+22.7%+32.1%+32.1%-2.2%
IBCP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — PRK and FIS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

FIS is the less volatile stock with a 0.76 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FULT's 1.13 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PRK currently trades 97.4% from its 52-week high vs FIS's 57.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricPRK logoPRKPark National Cor…FULT logoFULTFulton Financial …IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …FIS logoFISFidelity National…
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5000.79x1.12x0.81x0.65x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$179.48$22.99$37.39$82.74
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$149.06$16.60$29.63$43.30
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+97.4%+93.3%+90.8%+57.1%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10057.255.850.643.3
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded90K2.0M176K5.5M
Evenly matched — PRK and FIS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Evenly matched — FULT and IBCP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: PRK as "Hold", FULT as "Hold", IBCP as "Hold", FIS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.6% upside for FIS (target: $67) vs 7.6% for PRK (target: $188). For income investors, FULT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.59% vs IBCP's 3.05%.

MetricPRK logoPRKPark National Cor…FULT logoFULTFulton Financial …IBCP logoIBCPIndependent Bank …FIS logoFISFidelity National…
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellHoldHoldHoldBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$188.00$24.00$38.00$67.38
# AnalystsCovering analysts320737
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+3.2%+3.6%+3.0%+3.5%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises22111
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$5.56$0.77$1.03$1.63
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap+0.6%+1.6%+1.8%0.0%
Evenly matched — FULT and IBCP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

PRK leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). FULT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.

Best OverallPark National Corporation (PRK)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

PRK vs FULT vs IBCP vs FIS: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is PRK or FULT or IBCP or FIS a better buy right now?

For growth investors, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.

(FIS) is the stronger pick with 5. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 3% for Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP). Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) offers the better valuation at 10. 3x trailing P/E (10. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) a "Buy" — based on 37 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — PRK or FULT or IBCP or FIS?

On trailing P/E, Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) is the cheapest at 10.

3x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 63. 0x. On forward P/E, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 5x — 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. 31x versus Park National Corporation's 1. 90x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — PRK or FULT or IBCP or FIS?

Over the past 5 years, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) delivered a total return of +63.

7%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IBCP returned +188. 6% versus FIS's -18. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — PRK or FULT or IBCP or FIS?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.

(FIS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 65β versus Fulton Financial Corporation's 1. 12β — meaning FULT is approximately 72% more volatile than FIS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Park National Corporation (PRK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 37% for Fulton Financial Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — PRK or FULT or IBCP or FIS?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.

(FIS) is pulling ahead at 5. 4% versus -0. 3% for Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fulton Financial Corporation grew EPS 32. 5% 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — PRK or FULT or IBCP or FIS?

Park National Corporation (PRK) is the more profitable company, earning 27.

1% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PRK leads at 33. 3% versus 16. 5% for FIS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PRK leads at 82. 1%, 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.

07

Is PRK or FULT or IBCP or FIS 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. 31x versus Park National Corporation's 1. 90x. 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 7. 5x forward P/E versus 13. 9x for Park National Corporation — 6. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 42. 6% to $67. 38.

08

Which pays a better dividend — PRK or FULT or IBCP or FIS?

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) offers the highest yield at 3. 6%, versus 3. 0% for Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP).

09

Is PRK or FULT or IBCP or FIS better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.

(FIS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 65), 3. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FIS: -18. 4%, FULT: +106. 5%), 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.

10

What are the main differences between PRK and FULT and IBCP and FIS?

These companies operate in different sectors (PRK (Financial Services) and FULT (Financial Services) and IBCP (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: PRK is a small-cap deep-value stock; FULT is a small-cap deep-value stock; IBCP is a small-cap deep-value stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented 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.

Stocks Like

PRK

Dividend Mega-Cap Quality

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 16%
  • Dividend Yield > 1.2%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

FULT

Dividend Mega-Cap Quality

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 12%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

IBCP

Dividend Mega-Cap Quality

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 13%
  • Dividend Yield > 1.2%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

FIS

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Technology
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Gross Margin > 22%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform PRK and FULT and IBCP and FIS on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(PRK: 2.9% · FULT: 5.0%)
Net Margin>
%
(PRK: 27.1% · FULT: 20.7%)
P/E Ratio<
x
(PRK: 15.7x · FULT: 10.3x)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.