Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
SBFG vs WAFD vs ICE vs CSGP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Real Estate - Services
SBFG vs WAFD vs ICE vs CSGP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Real Estate - Services |
| Market Cap | $147M | $2.85B | $79.60B | $13.92B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $91M | $1.39B | $12.64B | $3.41B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $14M | $243M | $3.30B | $25M |
| Gross Margin | 70.6% | 52.8% | 61.9% | 77.4% |
| Operating Margin | 19.0% | 22.4% | 38.7% | -0.8% |
| Forward P/E | 9.4x | 11.4x | 17.3x | 24.1x |
| Total Debt | $74M | $1.82B | $20.28B | $1.14B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $72M | $657M | $837M | $1.73B |
SBFG vs WAFD vs ICE vs CSGP — 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% |
| WaFd, Inc. (WAFD) | 100 | 138.1 | +38.1% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 153.4 | +53.4% |
| CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) | 100 | 46.2 | -53.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SBFG vs WAFD vs ICE vs CSGP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SBFG is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and defensive.
- Rev growth 11.9%, EPS growth 27.3%
- Beta 0.64, yield 2.6%, current ratio 3.66x
- NIM 3.1% vs WAFD's 2.5%
- Lower P/E (9.4x vs 24.1x)
WAFD is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 16 yrs, beta 0.66, yield 2.8%
- 2.8% yield, 16-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +32.5% vs CSGP's -60.1%
ICE carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 195.3% 10Y total return vs SBFG's 167.5%
- PEG 1.95 vs WAFD's 3.69
- 26.1% margin vs CSGP's 0.7%
- Beta 0.35 vs WAFD's 0.66
CSGP is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.47, Low D/E 13.7%, current ratio 2.84x
- 18.7% FFO/revenue growth vs WAFD's -1.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.7% FFO/revenue growth vs WAFD's -1.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.4x vs 24.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 26.1% margin vs CSGP's 0.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs WAFD's 0.66 | |
| Dividends | 2.8% yield, 16-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +32.5% vs CSGP's -60.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.3% ROA vs CSGP's 0.2%, ROIC 7.5% vs -0.9% |
SBFG vs WAFD vs ICE vs CSGP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
SBFG vs WAFD vs ICE vs CSGP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ICE leads in 2 of 6 categories
SBFG leads 2 • WAFD leads 1 • CSGP leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.6B annually — 138.8x SBFG's $91M. ICE is the more profitable business, keeping 26.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CSGP's 0.7%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $91M | $1.4B | $12.6B | $3.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $19M | $277M | $6.5B | $278M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $14M | $243M | $3.3B | $25M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $20M | $215M | $4.3B | $241M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.6% | +52.8% | +61.9% | +77.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +19.0% | +22.4% | +38.7% | -0.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.4% | +17.5% | +26.1% | +0.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +21.7% | +15.5% | +33.9% | +7.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +22.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.5% | +46.3% | +23.1% | +127.7% |
Valuation Metrics
SBFG leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.6x trailing earnings, SBFG trades at a 99% valuation discount to CSGP's 1978.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ICE offers better value at 2.74x vs WAFD's 4.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $147M | $2.9B | $79.6B | $13.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $150M | $4.0B | $99.0B | $13.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 10.64x | 14.10x | 24.36x | 1978.31x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.44x | 11.35x | 17.34x | 24.11x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.32x | 4.58x | 2.74x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.69x | 13.41x | 15.34x | 78.41x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.61x | 2.02x | 6.30x | 4.29x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.05x | 0.98x | 2.77x | 1.66x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.85x | 13.71x | 18.56x | 339.47x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ICE leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ICE delivers a 11.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $0 for CSGP. CSGP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.14x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ICE's 0.70x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs CSGP's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.3% | +8.0% | +11.6% | +0.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.9% | +0.9% | +2.3% | +0.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.3% | +3.9% | +7.5% | -0.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.0% | +5.7% | +9.5% | -0.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 | 9 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.53x | 0.60x | 0.70x | 0.14x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3M | $1.2B | $19.4B | -$589M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $72M | $657M | $837M | $1.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $74M | $1.8B | $20.3B | $1.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.68x | 0.48x | 6.53x | 1.58x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SBFG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SBFG five years ago would be worth $14,484 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,733 for CSGP. Over the past 12 months, WAFD leads with a +32.5% total return vs CSGP's -60.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SBFG at 25.6% vs CSGP's -25.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +10.6% | +17.1% | -11.8% | -50.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +30.3% | +32.5% | -20.4% | -60.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +98.0% | +37.6% | +34.6% | -59.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +44.8% | +29.5% | +30.9% | -62.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +167.5% | +91.9% | +195.3% | +57.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +25.6% | +11.2% | +10.4% | -25.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — WAFD and ICE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ICE is the less volatile stock with a 0.35 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than WAFD's 0.66 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WAFD currently trades 99.9% from its 52-week high vs CSGP's 33.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.64x | 0.66x | 0.35x | 0.47x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $23.93 | $37.10 | $189.35 | $97.43 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.10 | $26.31 | $136.67 | $31.36 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.4% | +99.9% | +74.2% | +33.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.2 | 63.8 | 31.9 | 40.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 10K | 525K | 3.2M | 6.8M |
Analyst Outlook
WAFD leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: WAFD as "Hold", ICE as "Buy", CSGP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 86.3% upside for CSGP (target: $61) vs -5.6% for WAFD (target: $35). For income investors, WAFD offers the higher dividend yield at 2.84% vs ICE's 1.38%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $35.00 | $194.00 | $61.18 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 11 | 36 | 25 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +2.8% | +1.4% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 12 | 16 | 13 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.60 | $1.05 | $1.93 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.9% | +3.6% | +1.7% | +4.1% |
ICE leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). SBFG leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 1 tied.
SBFG vs WAFD vs ICE vs CSGP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SBFG or WAFD or ICE or CSGP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, CoStar Group, Inc.
(CSGP) is the stronger pick with 18. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for WaFd, Inc. (WAFD). 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 WAFD or ICE or CSGP?
On trailing P/E, SB Financial Group, Inc.
(SBFG) is the cheapest at 10. 6x versus CoStar Group, Inc. at 1978. 3x. 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: Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. wins at 1. 95x versus WaFd, Inc. 's 3. 69x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SBFG or WAFD or ICE or CSGP?
Over the past 5 years, SB Financial Group, Inc.
(SBFG) delivered a total return of +44. 8%, compared to -62. 7% for CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ICE returned +195. 3% versus CSGP's +57. 2%. 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 WAFD or ICE or CSGP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 35β versus WaFd, Inc. 's 0. 66β — meaning WAFD is approximately 89% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 70% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SBFG or WAFD or ICE or CSGP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), CoStar Group, Inc.
(CSGP) is pulling ahead at 18. 7% versus -1. 6% for WaFd, Inc. (WAFD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: SB Financial Group, Inc. grew EPS 27. 3% year-over-year, compared to -95. 1% for CoStar Group, 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.
06Which has better profit margins — SBFG or WAFD or ICE or CSGP?
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus 0. 2% for CoStar Group, 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 -2. 2% for CSGP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CSGP leads at 75. 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.
07Is SBFG or WAFD or ICE or CSGP 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, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 95x versus WaFd, Inc. 's 3. 69x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, SB Financial Group, Inc. (SBFG) trades at 9. 4x forward P/E versus 24. 1x for CoStar Group, Inc. — 14. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CSGP: 86. 3% to $61. 18.
08Which pays a better dividend — SBFG or WAFD or ICE or CSGP?
In this comparison, WAFD (2.
8% yield), SBFG (2. 6% yield), ICE (1. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CSGP does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SBFG or WAFD or ICE or CSGP better for a retirement portfolio?
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. 35), 1. 4% yield, +195. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +195. 3%, CSGP: +57. 2%), 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 WAFD and ICE and CSGP?
These companies operate in different sectors (SBFG (Financial Services) and WAFD (Financial Services) and ICE (Financial Services) and CSGP (Real Estate)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: SBFG is a small-cap deep-value stock; WAFD is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CSGP is a mid-cap high-growth stock. SBFG, WAFD, ICE pay a dividend while CSGP does 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.