Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TBBK vs WSFS vs V vs FIS vs MA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Financial - Credit Services
Information Technology Services
Financial - Credit Services
TBBK vs WSFS vs V vs FIS vs MA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Financial - Credit Services | Information Technology Services | Financial - Credit Services |
| Market Cap | $2.51B | $3.80B | $616.45B | $24.47B | $443.44B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $690M | $1.36B | $40.00B | $10.89B | $32.79B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $228M | $287M | $22.24B | $382M | $15.57B |
| Gross Margin | 74.3% | 74.7% | 80.4% | 38.1% | 83.4% |
| Operating Margin | 43.9% | 28.0% | 60.0% | 17.5% | 59.2% |
| Forward P/E | 10.1x | 11.8x | 24.6x | 7.5x | 25.5x |
| Total Debt | $422M | $303M | $25.17B | $4.01B | $19.00B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8M | $1.33B | $20.15B | $599M | $10.57B |
TBBK vs WSFS vs V vs FIS vs MA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Bancorp, Inc. (TBBK) | 100 | 676.1 | +576.1% |
| WSFS Financial Corp… (WSFS) | 100 | 260.4 | +160.4% |
| Visa Inc. (V) | 100 | 164.6 | +64.6% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 34.0 | -66.0% |
| Mastercard Incorpor… (MA) | 100 | 166.5 | +66.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TBBK vs WSFS vs V vs FIS vs MA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TBBK is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and bank quality.
- 9.9% 10Y total return vs MA's 437.2%
- NIM 4.0% vs WSFS's 3.4%
WSFS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +37.7% vs FIS's -35.3%
V is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.68, yield 0.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.68, Low D/E 66.4%, current ratio 1.08x
- Beta 0.68, yield 0.7%, current ratio 1.08x
- 50.1% margin vs FIS's 3.5%
FIS is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.31 vs V's 1.55
- Lower P/E (7.5x vs 25.5x), PEG 0.31 vs 1.22
MA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 16.4%, EPS growth 18.9%
- 16.4% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1%
- Beta 0.67 vs TBBK's 1.44
- 29.5% ROA vs FIS's 1.1%, ROIC 56.5% vs 6.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.4% NII/revenue growth vs WSFS's -3.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.5x vs 25.5x), PEG 0.31 vs 1.22 | |
| Quality / Margins | 50.1% margin vs FIS's 3.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.67 vs TBBK's 1.44 | |
| Dividends | 0.7% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs FIS's 3.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +37.7% vs FIS's -35.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 29.5% ROA vs FIS's 1.1%, ROIC 56.5% vs 6.0% |
TBBK vs WSFS vs V vs FIS vs MA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
TBBK vs WSFS vs V vs FIS vs MA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
V leads in 1 of 6 categories
TBBK leads 1 • MA leads 1 • WSFS leads 1 • FIS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
V leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
V is the larger business by revenue, generating $40.0B annually — 57.9x TBBK's $690M. V is the more profitable business, keeping 50.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FIS's 3.5%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $690M | $1.4B | $40.0B | $10.9B | $32.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $306M | $408M | $27.6B | $3.8B | $21.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $228M | $287M | $22.2B | $382M | $15.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $260M | $214M | $21.2B | $2.8B | $17.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +74.3% | +74.7% | +80.4% | +38.1% | +83.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +43.9% | +28.0% | +60.0% | +17.5% | +59.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +33.1% | +21.1% | +50.1% | +3.5% | +45.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +37.4% | +15.7% | +53.9% | +26.1% | +51.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +8.2% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.3% | +22.9% | +35.3% | +92.3% | +21.2% |
Valuation Metrics
TBBK leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.1x trailing earnings, TBBK trades at a 81% valuation discount to FIS's 63.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TBBK offers better value at 0.42x vs FIS's 2.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.5B | $3.8B | $616.4B | $24.5B | $443.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.9B | $2.8B | $621.5B | $27.9B | $451.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.09x | 14.16x | 31.50x | 63.00x | 30.32x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.07x | 11.79x | 24.59x | 7.54x | 25.55x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.42x | 0.81x | 1.99x | 2.58x | 1.44x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.65x | 6.80x | 24.65x | 7.66x | 22.00x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.64x | 2.79x | 15.41x | 2.29x | 13.52x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.00x | 1.44x | 16.66x | 1.76x | 58.07x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.73x | 17.79x | 28.57x | 9.97x | 26.22x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MA leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MA delivers a 2.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $2 in annual profit, vs $3 for FIS. WSFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MA's 2.45x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MA scores 9/9 vs V's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +28.9% | +10.6% | +58.9% | +2.7% | +2.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.5% | +1.4% | +22.7% | +1.1% | +29.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +22.4% | +9.5% | +29.2% | +6.0% | +56.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.0% | +10.3% | +36.2% | +6.6% | +64.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.61x | 0.11x | 0.66x | 0.29x | 2.45x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $414M | -$1.0B | $5.0B | $3.4B | $8.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8M | $1.3B | $20.2B | $599M | $10.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $422M | $303M | $25.2B | $4.0B | $19.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.72x | 1.30x | 26.72x | 4.64x | 27.23x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WSFS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TBBK five years ago would be worth $24,435 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,685 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, WSFS leads with a +37.7% total return vs FIS's -35.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WSFS at 33.0% vs FIS's -2.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -12.1% | +31.2% | -7.1% | -27.3% | -10.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +16.1% | +37.7% | -7.4% | -35.3% | -11.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +100.1% | +135.3% | +41.2% | -6.6% | +32.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +144.4% | +43.1% | +42.6% | -63.2% | +36.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +991.7% | +129.0% | +329.1% | -13.2% | +437.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +26.0% | +33.0% | +12.2% | -2.2% | +9.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — WSFS and MA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MA is the less volatile stock with a 0.67 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TBBK's 1.44 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WSFS currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs FIS's 57.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.44x | 0.89x | 0.68x | 0.76x | 0.67x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $81.65 | $73.22 | $375.51 | $82.74 | $601.77 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $48.86 | $49.92 | $293.89 | $43.30 | $480.50 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.9% | +98.4% | +85.6% | +57.1% | +83.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.4 | 64.0 | 53.3 | 43.3 | 42.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 459K | 385K | 6.9M | 5.5M | 3.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — V and FIS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TBBK as "Buy", WSFS as "Hold", V as "Buy", FIS as "Buy", MA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.6% upside for FIS (target: $67) vs -2.5% for TBBK (target: $58). For income investors, FIS offers the higher dividend yield at 3.45% vs MA's 0.61%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $58.00 | $74.67 | $362.45 | $67.38 | $656.87 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 13 | 61 | 37 | 64 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.9% | +0.7% | +3.5% | +0.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.68 | $2.36 | $1.63 | $3.07 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +15.1% | +7.6% | +2.2% | 0.0% | +2.6% |
V leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). TBBK leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
TBBK vs WSFS vs V vs FIS vs MA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TBBK or WSFS or V or FIS or MA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the stronger pick with 16.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). The Bancorp, Inc. (TBBK) offers the better valuation at 12. 1x trailing P/E (10. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Bancorp, Inc. (TBBK) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — TBBK or WSFS or V or FIS or MA?
On trailing P/E, The Bancorp, Inc.
(TBBK) is the cheapest at 12. 1x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 63. 0x. On forward P/E, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 5x — 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: Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. wins at 0. 31x versus Visa Inc. 's 1. 55x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TBBK or WSFS or V or FIS or MA?
Over the past 5 years, The Bancorp, Inc.
(TBBK) delivered a total return of +144. 4%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TBBK returned +991. 7% versus FIS's -13. 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 — TBBK or WSFS or V or FIS or MA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
67β versus The Bancorp, Inc. 's 1. 44β — meaning TBBK is approximately 116% more volatile than MA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 2% for Mastercard Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TBBK or WSFS or V or FIS or MA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is pulling ahead at 16.
4% versus -3. 1% for WSFS Financial Corporation (WSFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Mastercard Incorporated grew EPS 18. 9% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, 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 — TBBK or WSFS or V or FIS or MA?
Visa Inc.
(V) is the more profitable company, earning 50. 1% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 50. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: V leads at 60. 0% versus 16. 5% for FIS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MA leads at 83. 4%, 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 TBBK or WSFS or V or FIS or MA 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, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 31x versus Visa Inc. 's 1. 55x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) trades at 7. 5x forward P/E versus 25. 5x for Mastercard Incorporated — 18. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 42. 6% to $67. 38.
08Which pays a better dividend — TBBK or WSFS or V or FIS or MA?
In this comparison, FIS (3.
5% yield), WSFS (0. 9% yield), V (0. 7% yield), MA (0. 6% yield) pay a dividend. TBBK does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TBBK or WSFS or V or FIS or MA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
67), 0. 6% yield, +437. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MA: +437. 2%, TBBK: +991. 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.
10What are the main differences between TBBK and WSFS and V and FIS and MA?
These companies operate in different sectors (TBBK (Financial Services) and WSFS (Financial Services) and V (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology) and MA (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TBBK is a small-cap deep-value stock; WSFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; V is a large-cap quality compounder stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; MA is a large-cap high-growth stock. WSFS, V, FIS, MA pay a dividend while TBBK 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.
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.