RJF vs SF

For growth investors, Raymond James Financial, Inc.

(RJF) is the stronger pick with 7. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 6. 9% for Stifel Financial Corp. (SF). Stifel Financial Corp. (SF) offers the better valuation at 13. 2x trailing P/E (12. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Stifel Financial Corp. (SF) a "Buy" — based on 22 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, Stifel Financial Corp.

(SF) is the cheapest at 13. 2x versus Raymond James Financial, Inc. at 15. 4x. On forward P/E, Stifel Financial Corp. is actually cheaper at 12. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Raymond James Financial, Inc. wins at 0. 62x versus Stifel Financial Corp. 's 1. 73x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Raymond James Financial, Inc.

(RJF) delivered a total return of +86. 0%, compared to +77. 2% for Stifel Financial Corp. (SF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SF returned +516. 7% versus RJF's +403. 7%. 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), Raymond James Financial, Inc.

(RJF) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 05β versus Stifel Financial Corp. 's 1. 23β — meaning SF is approximately 17% more volatile than RJF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 36% versus 36% for Stifel Financial Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Raymond James Financial, Inc.

(RJF) is pulling ahead at 7. 9% versus 6. 9% for Stifel Financial Corp. (SF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Raymond James Financial, Inc. grew EPS 6. 2% year-over-year, compared to -5. 9% for Stifel Financial Corp.. 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.

Raymond James Financial, Inc.

(RJF) is the more profitable company, earning 13. 4% net margin versus 10. 9% for Stifel Financial Corp. — meaning it keeps 13. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RJF leads at 28. 7% versus 13. 8% for SF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RJF leads at 88. 2%, 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, Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 62x versus Stifel Financial Corp. 's 1. 73x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Stifel Financial Corp. (SF) trades at 12. 4x forward P/E versus 13. 4x for Raymond James Financial, Inc. — 1. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SF: 20. 2% to $93. 44.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Stifel Financial Corp. (SF) offers the highest yield at 2. 4%, versus 1. 3% for Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Raymond James Financial, Inc.

(RJF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 05), 1. 3% yield, +403. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (RJF: +403. 7%, SF: +516. 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.

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.

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.