Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SFBC vs WSBF vs BSVN vs WAFD vs ICE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
SFBC vs WSBF vs BSVN vs WAFD vs ICE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges |
| Market Cap | $107M | $340M | $419M | $2.72B | $83.75B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $62M | $202M | $137M | $1.41B | $12.64B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $7M | $26M | $43M | $243M | $3.30B |
| Gross Margin | 63.1% | 71.2% | 70.2% | 50.9% | 61.9% |
| Operating Margin | 14.1% | 16.6% | 41.4% | 20.5% | 38.7% |
| Forward P/E | 15.0x | 18.3x | 10.0x | 10.9x | 18.3x |
| Total Debt | $21M | $412M | $0.00 | $1.82B | $20.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $138M | $64M | $245M | $657M | $837M |
SFBC vs WSBF vs BSVN vs WAFD vs ICE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sound Financial Ban… (SFBC) | 100 | 172.8 | +72.8% |
| Waterstone Financia… (WSBF) | 100 | 124.8 | +24.8% |
| Bank7 Corp. (BSVN) | 100 | 407.6 | +307.6% |
| WaFd, Inc. (WAFD) | 100 | 132.5 | +32.5% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 161.4 | +61.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SFBC vs WSBF vs BSVN vs WAFD vs ICE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SFBC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.27, Low D/E 19.6%, current ratio 0.15x
- Beta 0.27 vs BSVN's 0.75
WSBF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive is your priority.
- Beta 0.58, yield 3.3%, current ratio 8.78x
- 3.3% yield, vs ICE's 1.3%
- +47.8% vs ICE's -16.1%
BSVN is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency and bank quality.
- PEG 0.58 vs WAFD's 3.54
- NIM 4.5% vs WAFD's 2.5%
- Lower P/E (10.0x vs 18.3x), PEG 0.58 vs 2.06
WAFD is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 7 yrs, beta 0.74, yield 3.0%
ICE carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 7.5%, EPS growth 20.7%
- 197.3% 10Y total return vs BSVN's 157.6%
- 7.5% NII/revenue growth vs BSVN's -3.9%
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs WSBF's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 7.5% NII/revenue growth vs BSVN's -3.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.0x vs 18.3x), PEG 0.58 vs 2.06 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs WSBF's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.27 vs BSVN's 0.75 | |
| Dividends | 3.3% yield, vs ICE's 1.3% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +47.8% vs ICE's -16.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs WSBF's 0.5% |
SFBC vs WSBF vs BSVN vs WAFD vs ICE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
SFBC vs WSBF vs BSVN vs WAFD vs ICE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BSVN leads in 2 of 6 categories
SFBC leads 0 • WSBF leads 0 • WAFD leads 0 • ICE leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — WSBF and BSVN each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.6B annually — 205.1x SFBC's $62M. BSVN is the more profitable business, keeping 31.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SFBC's 11.6%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $62M | $202M | $137M | $1.4B | $12.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $10M | $33M | $58M | $277M | $6.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $7M | $26M | $43M | $243M | $3.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $7M | $475,000 | $36M | $226M | $4.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +63.1% | +71.2% | +70.2% | +50.9% | +61.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +14.1% | +16.6% | +41.4% | +20.5% | +38.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.6% | +13.1% | +31.4% | +16.0% | +26.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +11.3% | +8.9% | +33.6% | +14.8% | +33.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +17.6% | +57.1% | -3.4% | +46.3% | +23.1% |
Valuation Metrics
BSVN leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.8x trailing earnings, BSVN trades at a 62% valuation discount to ICE's 25.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BSVN offers better value at 0.58x vs WAFD's 4.39x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $107M | $340M | $419M | $2.7B | $83.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$10M | $689M | $174M | $3.9B | $103.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.01x | 12.51x | 9.84x | 13.52x | 25.62x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 18.33x | 9.96x | 10.89x | 18.31x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.58x | 4.39x | 2.88x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | -1.13x | 20.59x | 3.00x | 12.96x | 15.98x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.74x | 1.69x | 3.05x | 1.93x | 6.63x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.98x | 0.95x | 1.69x | 0.94x | 2.91x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 15.33x | 19.03x | 9.08x | 13.05x | 19.53x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — BSVN and ICE each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BSVN delivers a 18.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $7 for SFBC. SFBC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.20x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WSBF's 1.18x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs BSVN's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.7% | +7.7% | +18.2% | +8.0% | +11.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.7% | +1.2% | +2.3% | +1.0% | +2.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.7% | +3.2% | +18.3% | +3.9% | +7.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.8% | +2.6% | +5.2% | +5.7% | +9.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.20x | 1.18x | — | 0.60x | 0.70x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$117M | $349M | -$245M | $1.2B | $19.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $138M | $64M | $245M | $657M | $837M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $21M | $412M | $0 | $1.8B | $20.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.38x | 0.56x | 1.39x | 0.48x | 6.53x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BSVN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BSVN five years ago would be worth $26,128 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,352 for SFBC. Over the past 12 months, WSBF leads with a +47.8% total return vs ICE's -16.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BSVN at 26.4% vs SFBC's 5.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -3.1% | +14.4% | +7.6% | +12.4% | -7.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -15.0% | +47.8% | +16.1% | +27.9% | -16.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +17.3% | +47.9% | +102.0% | +45.0% | +46.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +3.5% | +15.2% | +161.3% | +21.4% | +42.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +105.9% | +91.7% | +157.6% | +78.6% | +197.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +5.5% | +13.9% | +26.4% | +13.2% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SFBC and WSBF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SFBC is the less volatile stock with a 0.27 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BSVN's 0.75 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WSBF currently trades 98.0% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 78.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.27x | 0.58x | 0.75x | 0.74x | 0.36x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $50.69 | $18.88 | $50.10 | $36.53 | $189.35 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $40.67 | $12.71 | $36.91 | $26.31 | $143.17 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.3% | +98.0% | +88.3% | +97.3% | +78.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.7 | 58.1 | 59.6 | 58.2 | 34.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 7K | 67K | 12K | 603K | 2.9M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — WSBF and ICE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: WSBF as "Hold", BSVN as "Buy", WAFD as "Hold", ICE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 32.9% upside for ICE (target: $196) vs -1.6% for WAFD (target: $35). For income investors, WSBF offers the higher dividend yield at 3.26% vs ICE's 1.31%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $57.00 | $35.00 | $196.43 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 2 | 3 | 11 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.8% | +3.3% | +2.2% | +3.0% | +1.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 4 | 7 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.76 | $0.60 | $0.98 | $1.05 | $1.93 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +4.8% | +0.3% | +3.7% | +1.7% |
BSVN leads in 2 of 6 categories — strongest in Valuation Metrics and Total Returns. 4 categories are tied.
SFBC vs WSBF vs BSVN vs WAFD vs ICE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SFBC or WSBF or BSVN or WAFD or ICE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the stronger pick with 7. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 9% for Bank7 Corp. (BSVN). Bank7 Corp. (BSVN) offers the better valuation at 9. 8x trailing P/E (10. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Bank7 Corp. (BSVN) a "Buy" — based on 3 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 — SFBC or WSBF or BSVN or WAFD or ICE?
On trailing P/E, Bank7 Corp.
(BSVN) is the cheapest at 9. 8x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. at 25. 6x. On forward P/E, Bank7 Corp. is actually cheaper at 10. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Bank7 Corp. wins at 0. 58x versus WaFd, Inc. 's 3. 54x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SFBC or WSBF or BSVN or WAFD or ICE?
Over the past 5 years, Bank7 Corp.
(BSVN) delivered a total return of +161. 3%, compared to +3. 5% for Sound Financial Bancorp, Inc. (SFBC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ICE returned +197. 3% versus WAFD's +78. 6%. 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 — SFBC or WSBF or BSVN or WAFD or ICE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Sound Financial Bancorp, Inc.
(SFBC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 27β versus Bank7 Corp. 's 0. 75β — meaning BSVN is approximately 175% more volatile than SFBC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Sound Financial Bancorp, Inc. (SFBC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 20% versus 118% for Waterstone Financial, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SFBC or WSBF or BSVN or WAFD or ICE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is pulling ahead at 7. 5% versus -3. 9% for Bank7 Corp. (BSVN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Sound Financial Bancorp, Inc. grew EPS 54. 4% year-over-year, compared to -7. 0% for Bank7 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.
06Which has better profit margins — SFBC or WSBF or BSVN or WAFD or ICE?
Bank7 Corp.
(BSVN) is the more profitable company, earning 31. 4% net margin versus 11. 6% for Sound Financial Bancorp, Inc. — meaning it keeps 31. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BSVN leads at 41. 4% versus 14. 1% for SFBC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WSBF leads at 71. 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 SFBC or WSBF or BSVN or WAFD or ICE 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, Bank7 Corp. (BSVN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 58x versus WaFd, Inc. 's 3. 54x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Bank7 Corp. (BSVN) trades at 10. 0x forward P/E versus 18. 3x for Waterstone Financial, Inc. — 8. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 32. 9% to $196. 43.
08Which pays a better dividend — SFBC or WSBF or BSVN or WAFD or ICE?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Waterstone Financial, Inc. (WSBF) offers the highest yield at 3. 3%, versus 1. 3% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE).
09Is SFBC or WSBF or BSVN or WAFD or ICE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Sound Financial Bancorp, Inc.
(SFBC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 27), 1. 8% yield, +105. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SFBC: +105. 9%, WAFD: +78. 6%), 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 SFBC and WSBF and BSVN and WAFD and ICE?
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: SFBC is a small-cap deep-value stock; WSBF is a small-cap deep-value stock; BSVN is a small-cap deep-value stock; WAFD is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-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.
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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.