QCRH vs ICE vs FIS vs FISV

For growth investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the stronger pick with 7. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 5% for QCR Holdings, Inc. (QCRH). Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) offers the better valuation at 9. 0x trailing P/E (7. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate QCR Holdings, Inc. (QCRH) a "Buy" — based on 8 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.

On trailing P/E, Fiserv, Inc.

(FISV) is the cheapest at 9. 0x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 63. 0x. On forward P/E, Fiserv, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Fiserv, Inc. wins at 0. 20x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 19x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, QCR Holdings, Inc.

(QCRH) delivered a total return of +91. 7%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: QCRH returned +257. 6% versus FIS's -13. 2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 33β versus QCR Holdings, Inc. 's 0. 95β — meaning QCRH is approximately 191% 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 113% for Fiserv, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is pulling ahead at 7. 5% versus 1. 5% for QCR Holdings, Inc. (QCRH). 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.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FISV leads at 6. 1% annualised revenue growth. 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.

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 16. 5% for FIS. 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.

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, Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 20x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 19x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) trades at 7. 0x forward P/E versus 19. 5x for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — 12. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 42. 6% to $67. 38.

In this comparison, FIS (3.

5% yield), ICE (1. 2% yield), QCRH (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. FISV does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

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. 33), 1. 2% yield, +225. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +225. 3%, FISV: +9. 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.

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

In terms of investment character: QCRH is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; FISV is a mid-cap deep-value stock. ICE, FIS pay a dividend while QCRH, FISV do 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.