Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
SBFG vs ICE vs JPM vs CME vs GS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Banks - Diversified
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Financial - Capital Markets
SBFG vs ICE vs JPM vs CME vs GS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Banks - Diversified | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $147M | $79.60B | $896.00B | $97.79B | $337.53B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $91M | $12.64B | $280.33B | $6.76B | $125.10B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $14M | $3.30B | $57.05B | $4.24B | $17.18B |
| Gross Margin | 70.6% | 61.9% | 60.0% | 86.3% | 47.5% |
| Operating Margin | 19.0% | 38.7% | 25.9% | 65.6% | 17.5% |
| Forward P/E | 9.4x | 17.3x | 14.4x | 22.0x | 17.9x |
| Total Debt | $74M | $20.28B | $942.38B | $3.76B | $609.53B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $72M | $837M | $343.34B | $4.42B | $164.26B |
SBFG vs ICE vs JPM vs CME vs GS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| SB Financial Group,… (SBFG) | 100 | 147.3 | +47.3% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 153.4 | +53.4% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
| CME Group Inc. (CME) | 100 | 165.8 | +65.8% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 537.8 | +437.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SBFG vs ICE vs JPM vs CME vs GS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SBFG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and defensive is your priority.
- Rev growth 11.9%, EPS growth 27.3%
- Beta 0.64, yield 2.6%, current ratio 3.66x
- NIM 3.1% vs GS's 0.7%
- 11.9% NII/revenue growth vs GS's -1.4%
ICE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.35, Low D/E 69.9%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.35 vs GS's 1.60, lower leverage
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.9%
- PEG 0.81 vs SBFG's 2.94
CME carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and dividends.
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs SBFG's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- 4.1% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs GS's 1.6%
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs SBFG's 0.5%
GS is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 6.7% 10Y total return vs JPM's 465.8%
- +72.7% vs ICE's -20.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.9% NII/revenue growth vs GS's -1.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.4x vs 17.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs SBFG's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs GS's 1.60, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.1% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs GS's 1.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +72.7% vs ICE's -20.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs SBFG's 0.5% |
SBFG vs ICE vs JPM vs CME vs GS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
SBFG vs ICE vs JPM vs CME vs GS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CME leads in 3 of 6 categories
SBFG leads 1 • GS leads 1 • ICE leads 0 • JPM leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CME leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 3079.7x SBFG's $91M. CME is the more profitable business, keeping 62.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GS's 13.7%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $91M | $12.6B | $280.3B | $6.8B | $125.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $19M | $6.5B | $81.4B | $4.7B | $24.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $14M | $3.3B | $57.0B | $4.2B | $17.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $20M | $4.3B | $100.9B | $4.4B | -$47.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.6% | +61.9% | +60.0% | +86.3% | +47.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +19.0% | +38.7% | +25.9% | +65.6% | +17.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.4% | +26.1% | +20.4% | +62.8% | +13.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +21.7% | +33.9% | +36.0% | +64.4% | -37.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.5% | +23.1% | +16.0% | +21.4% | +45.8% |
Valuation Metrics
SBFG leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.6x trailing earnings, SBFG trades at a 56% valuation discount to ICE's 24.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs SBFG's 3.32x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $147M | $79.6B | $896.0B | $97.8B | $337.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $150M | $99.0B | $1.50T | $97.1B | $782.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 10.64x | 24.36x | 16.00x | 24.15x | 20.71x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.44x | 17.34x | 14.40x | 21.98x | 17.93x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.32x | 2.74x | 0.90x | 1.76x | 1.32x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.69x | 15.34x | 18.36x | 21.56x | 32.57x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.61x | 6.30x | 3.20x | 15.00x | 2.70x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.05x | 2.77x | 2.47x | 3.38x | 2.70x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.85x | 18.56x | 8.88x | 23.32x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CME leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $10 for SBFG. CME carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 4.88x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs GS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.3% | +11.6% | +15.9% | +15.3% | +13.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.9% | +2.3% | +1.3% | +2.2% | +1.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.3% | +7.5% | +4.5% | +10.2% | +2.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.0% | +9.5% | +8.9% | +3.6% | +4.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.53x | 0.70x | 2.60x | 0.13x | 4.88x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3M | $19.4B | $599.0B | -$666M | $445.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $72M | $837M | $343.3B | $4.4B | $164.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $74M | $20.3B | $942.4B | $3.8B | $609.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.68x | 6.53x | 0.74x | 41.55x | 0.33x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $30,053 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,085 for ICE. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +72.7% total return vs ICE's -20.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 48.1% vs ICE's 10.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +10.6% | -11.8% | -0.5% | +3.2% | +17.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +30.3% | -20.4% | +21.8% | +3.6% | +72.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +98.0% | +34.6% | +138.2% | +67.9% | +224.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +44.8% | +30.9% | +118.2% | +46.2% | +200.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +167.5% | +195.3% | +465.8% | +262.4% | +666.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +25.6% | +10.4% | +33.6% | +18.9% | +48.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SBFG and CME each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CME is the less volatile stock with a -0.28 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GS's 1.60 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SBFG currently trades 97.4% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 74.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.64x | 0.35x | 0.94x | -0.28x | 1.60x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $23.93 | $189.35 | $337.25 | $329.16 | $1095.89 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.10 | $136.67 | $262.71 | $244.56 | $609.59 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.4% | +74.2% | +95.1% | +81.9% | +97.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.2 | 31.9 | 59.1 | 40.1 | 57.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 10K | 3.2M | 7.0M | 2.6M | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
CME leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ICE as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", CME as "Hold", GS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 38.0% upside for ICE (target: $194) vs -8.5% for GS (target: $973). For income investors, CME offers the higher dividend yield at 4.05% vs ICE's 1.38%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $194.00 | $339.75 | $320.80 | $972.70 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 36 | 61 | 36 | 55 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +1.4% | +1.9% | +4.1% | +1.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 12 | 13 | 15 | 15 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.60 | $1.93 | $5.95 | $10.92 | $16.62 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.9% | +1.7% | +3.9% | +0.3% | +3.7% |
CME leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). SBFG leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
SBFG vs ICE vs JPM vs CME vs GS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SBFG or ICE or JPM or CME or GS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, SB Financial Group, Inc.
(SBFG) is the stronger pick with 11. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 4% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS). SB Financial Group, Inc. (SBFG) offers the better valuation at 10. 6x trailing P/E (9. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) a "Buy" — based on 36 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 — SBFG or ICE or JPM or CME or GS?
On trailing P/E, SB Financial Group, Inc.
(SBFG) is the cheapest at 10. 6x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. at 24. 4x. On forward P/E, SB Financial Group, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus SB Financial Group, Inc. 's 2. 94x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SBFG or ICE or JPM or CME or GS?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) delivered a total return of +200. 5%, compared to +30. 9% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GS returned +666. 8% versus SBFG's +167. 5%. 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 — SBFG or ICE or JPM or CME or GS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 28β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 60β — meaning GS is approximately -671% more volatile than CME relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CME Group Inc. (CME) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SBFG or ICE or JPM or CME or GS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), SB Financial Group, Inc.
(SBFG) is pulling ahead at 11. 9% versus -1. 4% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: SB Financial Group, Inc. grew EPS 27. 3% year-over-year, compared to 1. 5% for JPMorgan Chase & Co.. 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 — SBFG or ICE or JPM or CME or GS?
CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the more profitable company, earning 62. 0% net margin versus 13. 7% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 62. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CME leads at 64. 9% versus 17. 5% for GS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CME leads at 86. 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.
07Is SBFG or ICE or JPM or CME or GS 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus SB Financial Group, Inc. 's 2. 94x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, SB Financial Group, Inc. (SBFG) trades at 9. 4x forward P/E versus 22. 0x for CME Group Inc. — 12. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 38. 0% to $194. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — SBFG or ICE or JPM or CME or GS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
CME Group Inc. (CME) offers the highest yield at 4. 1%, versus 1. 4% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE).
09Is SBFG or ICE or JPM or CME or GS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 28), 4. 1% yield, +262. 4% 10Y return). The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) carries a higher beta of 1. 60 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CME: +262. 4%, GS: +666. 8%), 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 SBFG and ICE and JPM and CME and GS?
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.
In terms of investment character: SBFG is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; CME is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; GS is a large-cap quality compounder 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.