Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SUPV vs GGAL vs BMA vs BBAR vs BSAC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
SUPV vs GGAL vs BMA vs BBAR vs BSAC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $751M | $5.73B | $4.70B | $3.14B | $14.38B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.33T | $10.63T | $6.46T | $5.20T | $4.66T |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-48.45B | $915.98B | $291.41B | $258.90B | $1.05T |
| Gross Margin | 39.5% | 62.7% | 68.3% | 65.9% | 48.8% |
| Operating Margin | -4.8% | 20.8% | 5.6% | 8.5% | 26.7% |
| Forward P/E | 0.0x | 0.0x | 0.0x | 0.0x | 0.0x |
| Total Debt | $1.05T | $2.16T | $465.41B | $349.00B | $15.88T |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.60T | $3.76T | $2.78T | $2.82T | $5.24T |
SUPV vs GGAL vs BMA vs BBAR vs BSAC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grupo Supervielle S… (SUPV) | 100 | 435.5 | +335.5% |
| Grupo Financiero Ga… (GGAL) | 100 | 539.8 | +439.8% |
| Banco Macro S.A. (BMA) | 100 | 436.3 | +336.3% |
| Banco BBVA Argentin… (BBAR) | 100 | 484.5 | +384.5% |
| Banco Santander-Chi… (BSAC) | 100 | 193.6 | +93.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SUPV vs GGAL vs BMA vs BBAR vs BSAC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SUPV is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth is your priority.
- 13.7% NII/revenue growth vs BMA's -33.3%
GGAL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 71.6% 10Y total return vs BMA's 48.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.73, Low D/E 35.6%, current ratio 0.66x
- PEG 0.00 vs BBAR's 0.00
- Lower P/E (0.0x vs 0.0x), PEG 0.00 vs 0.00
BMA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
BBAR is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 20.3% vs BSAC's 2.9%
BSAC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 100.0%
- Rev growth -5.0%, EPS growth 492.6%
- Beta 0.94, yield 100.0%, current ratio 0.21x
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BMA's 0.6% (lower = leaner)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 13.7% NII/revenue growth vs BMA's -33.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.0x vs 0.0x), PEG 0.00 vs 0.00 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BMA's 0.6% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.94 vs SUPV's 2.51 | |
| Dividends | 100.0% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs SUPV's 3.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +32.8% vs SUPV's -39.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs BMA's 0.6% |
SUPV vs GGAL vs BMA vs BBAR vs BSAC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BSAC leads in 3 of 6 categories
GGAL leads 1 • SUPV leads 0 • BMA leads 0 • BBAR leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BSAC leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GGAL is the larger business by revenue, generating $10.63T annually — 4.6x SUPV's $2.33T. BSAC is the more profitable business, keeping 21.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SUPV's -2.4%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.33T | $10.63T | $6.46T | $5.20T | $4.66T |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$73.4B | $1.35T | $620.9B | $421.5B | $1.45T |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$48.4B | $916.0B | $291.4B | $258.9B | $1.05T |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$725.2B | $3.62T | -$2.44T | -$3.96T | $776.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.5% | +62.7% | +68.3% | +65.9% | +48.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -4.8% | +20.8% | +5.6% | +8.5% | +26.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.4% | +15.3% | +5.0% | +6.9% | +21.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -48.6% | -27.4% | +12.3% | -102.7% | +13.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -157.4% | -138.6% | -136.4% | -64.8% | -8.2% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — SUPV and GGAL and BSAC each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 0.0x trailing earnings, BSAC trades at a 100% valuation discount to BMA's 20.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BSAC offers better value at 0.00x vs BMA's 0.40x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $751M | $5.7B | $4.7B | $3.1B | $14.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $356M | $4.6B | $3.0B | $1.4B | $26.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -18.25x | 5.06x | 20.42x | 12.33x | 0.03x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 0.01x | 0.01x | 0.01x | 0.01x | 0.01x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.04x | 0.40x | 0.20x | 0.00x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 2.65x | 8.47x | 3.61x | 17.04x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.45x | 0.75x | 1.01x | 0.84x | 2.77x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.03x | 1.47x | 1.64x | 1.67x | 0.03x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 8.22x | — | 20.64x |
Profitability & Efficiency
GGAL leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BSAC delivers a 21.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $-5 for SUPV. BMA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BSAC's 2.77x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BMA scores 6/9 vs SUPV's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -5.2% | +12.9% | +6.1% | +9.1% | +21.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.7% | +2.2% | +1.4% | +1.4% | +1.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -5.7% | +31.0% | +5.5% | +10.7% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.6% | +19.5% | +5.5% | +8.7% | +3.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.04x | 0.36x | 0.11x | 0.13x | 2.77x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$549.2B | -$203.1B | -$2.31T | -$2.47T | $10.64T |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.60T | $3.76T | $2.78T | $2.82T | $5.24T |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.05T | $2.16T | $465.4B | $349.0B | $15.88T |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.11x | 0.71x | 0.28x | 0.16x | 0.72x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BSAC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BBAR five years ago would be worth $63,418 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $15,452 for BSAC. Over the past 12 months, BSAC leads with a +32.8% total return vs SUPV's -39.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BMA at 69.4% vs BSAC's 20.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -25.5% | -18.1% | -13.9% | -13.6% | +2.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -39.8% | -23.2% | -9.1% | -21.3% | +32.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +292.6% | +304.2% | +386.0% | +312.5% | +74.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +399.6% | +517.5% | +520.7% | +534.2% | +54.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -18.9% | +71.6% | +48.5% | -9.5% | +125.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +57.8% | +59.3% | +69.4% | +60.4% | +20.4% |
Risk & Volatility
BSAC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BSAC is the less volatile stock with a 0.94 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SUPV's 2.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BSAC currently trades 80.9% from its 52-week high vs SUPV's 50.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.51x | 1.73x | 1.76x | 2.02x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $16.90 | $65.48 | $106.15 | $23.10 | $37.72 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $4.54 | $25.89 | $38.30 | $7.76 | $22.77 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +50.8% | +66.0% | +70.5% | +66.5% | +80.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.9 | 46.5 | 53.1 | 54.7 | 40.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 834K | 1.1M | 366K | 669K | 453K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — SUPV and BSAC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SUPV as "Sell", GGAL as "Buy", BMA as "Buy", BBAR as "Buy", BSAC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 73.6% upside for BMA (target: $130) vs -18.4% for SUPV (target: $7). For income investors, BSAC offers the higher dividend yield at 100.00% vs BBAR's 2.08%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $7.00 | $60.50 | $130.00 | $16.00 | $33.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 12 | 14 | 3 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.7% | +6.9% | +7.0% | +2.1% | +100.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $437.61 | $4146.37 | $7302.65 | $443.65 | $484767.98 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
BSAC leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). GGAL leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
SUPV vs GGAL vs BMA vs BBAR vs BSAC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SUPV or GGAL or BMA or BBAR or BSAC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Grupo Supervielle S.
A. (SUPV) is the stronger pick with 13. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -33. 3% for Banco Macro S. A. (BMA). Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) offers the better valuation at 0. 0x trailing P/E (0. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Grupo Financiero Galicia S. A. (GGAL) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — SUPV or GGAL or BMA or BBAR or BSAC?
On trailing P/E, Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) is the cheapest at 0.
0x versus Banco Macro S. A. at 20. 4x. On forward P/E, Grupo Financiero Galicia S. A. is actually cheaper at 0. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Grupo Financiero Galicia S. A. wins at 0. 00x versus Banco BBVA Argentina S. A. 's 0. 00x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SUPV or GGAL or BMA or BBAR or BSAC?
Over the past 5 years, Banco BBVA Argentina S.
A. (BBAR) delivered a total return of +534. 2%, compared to +54. 5% for Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BSAC returned +125. 2% versus SUPV's -18. 9%. 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 — SUPV or GGAL or BMA or BBAR or BSAC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
94β versus Grupo Supervielle S. A. 's 2. 51β — meaning SUPV is approximately 167% more volatile than BSAC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Banco Macro S. A. (BMA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 3% for Banco Santander-Chile — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SUPV or GGAL or BMA or BBAR or BSAC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Grupo Supervielle S.
A. (SUPV) is pulling ahead at 13. 7% versus -33. 3% for Banco Macro S. A. (BMA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Banco Santander-Chile grew EPS 492. 6% year-over-year, compared to -145. 9% for Grupo Supervielle S. A.. 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 — SUPV or GGAL or BMA or BBAR or BSAC?
Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) is the more profitable company, earning 21.
9% net margin versus -2. 4% for Grupo Supervielle S. A. — meaning it keeps 21. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BSAC leads at 26. 7% versus -4. 8% for SUPV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BMA leads at 68. 3%, 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 SUPV or GGAL or BMA or BBAR or BSAC 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, Grupo Financiero Galicia S. A. (GGAL) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 00x versus Banco BBVA Argentina S. A. 's 0. 00x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Grupo Financiero Galicia S. A. (GGAL) trades at 0. 0x forward P/E versus 0. 0x for Banco Santander-Chile — 0. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BMA: 73. 6% to $130. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — SUPV or GGAL or BMA or BBAR or BSAC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) offers the highest yield at 100. 0%, versus 2. 1% for Banco BBVA Argentina S. A. (BBAR).
09Is SUPV or GGAL or BMA or BBAR or BSAC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Banco Santander-Chile (BSAC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
94), 100. 0% yield, +125. 2% 10Y return). Grupo Supervielle S. A. (SUPV) carries a higher beta of 2. 51 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (BSAC: +125. 2%, SUPV: -18. 9%), 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 SUPV and GGAL and BMA and BBAR and BSAC?
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: SUPV is a small-cap income-oriented stock; GGAL is a small-cap deep-value stock; BMA is a small-cap income-oriented stock; BBAR is a small-cap deep-value stock; BSAC is a mid-cap deep-value 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.