Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
TCBX vs ICE vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
TCBX vs ICE vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $555M | $79.60B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $367M | $12.64B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $66M | $3.30B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 55.3% | 61.9% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 23.2% | 38.7% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 10.3x | 17.3x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $137M | $20.28B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $175M | $837M | $10.27B |
TCBX vs ICE vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Third Coast Bancsha… (TCBX) | 100 | 149.6 | +49.6% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 107.5 | +7.5% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 157.5 | +57.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TCBX vs ICE vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TCBX has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 8.5%, EPS growth 36.3%
- 196.7% 10Y total return vs ICE's 195.3%
- PEG 0.70 vs KO's 2.26
ICE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.35, yield 1.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.35, Low D/E 69.9%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.35, yield 1.4%, current ratio 1.02x
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is quality and dividends.
- 27.8% margin vs TCBX's 18.1%
- 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.4%
- 13.1% ROA vs TCBX's 1.3%, ROIC 15.8% vs 10.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.5% NII/revenue growth vs KO's 1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.3x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.70 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs TCBX's 18.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs TCBX's 0.83 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +29.7% vs ICE's -20.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs TCBX's 1.3%, ROIC 15.8% vs 10.1% |
TCBX vs ICE vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
TCBX vs ICE vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 134.3x TCBX's $367M. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TCBX's 18.1%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $367M | $12.6B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $90M | $6.5B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $66M | $3.3B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $48M | $4.3B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +55.3% | +61.9% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +23.2% | +38.7% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +18.1% | +26.1% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +13.1% | +33.9% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +41.7% | +23.1% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
TCBX leads this category, winning 7 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.6x trailing earnings, TCBX trades at a 61% valuation discount to KO's 27.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TCBX offers better value at 0.72x vs ICE's 2.74x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $555M | $79.6B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $516M | $99.0B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 10.58x | 24.36x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.27x | 17.34x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.72x | 2.74x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 5.73x | 15.34x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.51x | 6.30x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.24x | 2.77x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.52x | 18.56x | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $12 for ICE. TCBX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.26x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs KO's 7/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.1% | +11.6% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.3% | +2.3% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.1% | +7.5% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.4% | +9.5% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 9 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.26x | 0.70x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$38M | $19.4B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $175M | $837M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $137M | $20.3B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.54x | 6.53x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TCBX leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TCBX five years ago would be worth $29,672 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,085 for ICE. Over the past 12 months, TCBX leads with a +29.7% total return vs ICE's -20.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TCBX at 32.8% vs ICE's 10.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.1% | -11.8% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +29.7% | -20.4% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +134.1% | +34.6% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +196.7% | +30.9% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +196.7% | +195.3% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +32.8% | +10.4% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TCBX's 0.83 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% 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 | 0.83x | 0.35x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $43.84 | $189.35 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $29.66 | $136.67 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +91.4% | +74.2% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.5 | 31.9 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 84K | 3.2M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TCBX as "Buy", ICE as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 38.0% upside for ICE (target: $194) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.46% vs TCBX's 0.72%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $45.00 | $194.00 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 36 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.7% | +1.4% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 13 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.29 | $1.93 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.7% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Risk & Volatility). TCBX leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns).
TCBX vs ICE vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TCBX or ICE or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Third Coast Bancshares, Inc.
(TCBX) is the stronger pick with 8. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. (TCBX) offers the better valuation at 10. 6x trailing P/E (10. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. (TCBX) a "Buy" — based on 5 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 — TCBX or ICE or KO?
On trailing P/E, Third Coast Bancshares, Inc.
(TCBX) is the cheapest at 10. 6x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. wins at 0. 70x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TCBX or ICE or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Third Coast Bancshares, Inc.
(TCBX) delivered a total return of +196. 7%, compared to +30. 9% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TCBX returned +196. 7% versus KO's +121. 1%. 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 — TCBX or ICE or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. 's 0. 83β — meaning TCBX is approximately -513% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. (TCBX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 26% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TCBX or ICE or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Third Coast Bancshares, Inc.
(TCBX) is pulling ahead at 8. 5% versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. grew EPS 36. 3% year-over-year, compared to 20. 7% for Intercontinental Exchange, 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 — TCBX or ICE or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 18. 1% for Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus 23. 2% for TCBX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ICE leads at 61. 9%, 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 TCBX or ICE or KO 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, Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. (TCBX) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 70x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. (TCBX) trades at 10. 3x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 15. 0x 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 — TCBX or ICE or KO?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) offers the highest yield at 2. 5%, versus 0. 7% for Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. (TCBX).
09Is TCBX or ICE or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, TCBX: +196. 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 TCBX and ICE and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (TCBX (Financial Services) and ICE (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TCBX is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KO 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.