Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
TFC vs JPM vs BAC vs USB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Regional
TFC vs JPM vs BAC vs USB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $66.85B | $849.03B | $407.94B | $87.33B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $24.25B | $270.79B | $188.75B | $42.86B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $5.23B | $58.03B | $30.63B | $7.58B |
| Gross Margin | 47.0% | 58.6% | 55.4% | 62.8% |
| Operating Margin | -2.5% | 27.7% | 18.5% | 22.2% |
| Forward P/E | 11.2x | 14.2x | 12.1x | 11.0x |
| Total Debt | $62.27B | $751.15B | $365.90B | $77.93B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $39.77B | $469.32B | $231.84B | $46.89B |
TFC vs JPM vs BAC vs USB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Truist Financial Co… (TFC) | 100 | 138.1 | +38.1% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 323.6 | +223.6% |
| Bank of America Cor… (BAC) | 100 | 222.2 | +122.2% |
| U.S. Bancorp (USB) | 100 | 157.9 | +57.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TFC vs JPM vs BAC vs USB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TFC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if bank quality is your priority.
- NIM 2.7% vs BAC's 1.8%
- Lower P/E (11.2x vs 14.2x)
- 4.1% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
JPM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 1.00, yield 1.6%
- Rev growth 14.6%, EPS growth 21.7%
- 471.7% 10Y total return vs BAC's 332.5%
- 14.6% NII/revenue growth vs TFC's -19.0%
BAC is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.00, current ratio 0.42x
- PEG 0.78 vs USB's 1.29
- Beta 1.00, yield 2.4%, current ratio 0.42x
- Beta 1.00 vs TFC's 1.07
USB is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +42.1% vs JPM's +28.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.6% NII/revenue growth vs TFC's -19.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.2x vs 14.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs TFC's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.00 vs TFC's 1.07 | |
| Dividends | 4.1% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +42.1% vs JPM's +28.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs TFC's 0.5% |
TFC vs JPM vs BAC vs USB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TFC vs JPM vs BAC vs USB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
USB leads 1 • TFC leads 0 • BAC leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — JPM and USB each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $270.8B annually — 11.2x TFC's $24.3B. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 21.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BAC's 16.2%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $24.3B | $270.8B | $188.8B | $42.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $7.2B | $81.3B | $36.6B | $10.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $5.2B | $58.0B | $30.6B | $7.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $3.9B | -$119.7B | $12.6B | $5.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +47.0% | +58.6% | +55.4% | +62.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.5% | +27.7% | +18.5% | +22.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +19.9% | +21.6% | +16.2% | +17.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.9% | -15.5% | +6.7% | — |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -9.1% | +16.0% | +18.3% | +24.8% |
Valuation Metrics
USB leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.2x trailing earnings, USB trades at a 24% valuation discount to JPM's 15.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BAC offers better value at 0.91x vs USB's 1.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $66.8B | $849.0B | $407.9B | $87.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $89.3B | $1.13T | $542.0B | $118.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.12x | 15.94x | 14.03x | 12.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.20x | 14.17x | 12.05x | 11.04x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.23x | 0.91x | 1.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 236.37x | 13.62x | 14.80x | 11.50x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.76x | 3.14x | 2.16x | 2.04x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.06x | 2.63x | 1.33x | 1.33x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 30.89x | — | 32.34x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 16.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $8 for TFC. TFC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.98x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.18x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BAC scores 7/9 vs TFC's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.0% | +16.1% | +10.1% | +11.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.0% | +1.3% | +0.9% | +1.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.4% | +5.4% | +3.2% | +5.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.5% | +8.2% | +4.2% | +2.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.98x | 2.18x | 1.21x | 1.19x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $22.5B | $281.8B | $134.1B | $31.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $39.8B | $469.3B | $231.8B | $46.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $62.3B | $751.1B | $365.9B | $77.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.62x | 0.74x | 0.44x | 0.66x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,034 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,987 for TFC. Over the past 12 months, USB leads with a +42.1% total return vs JPM's +28.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 34.0% vs TFC's 25.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +3.2% | -2.3% | -3.7% | +5.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +35.7% | +28.7% | +33.9% | +42.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +98.4% | +140.8% | +104.6% | +109.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -0.1% | +110.3% | +38.9% | +7.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +101.7% | +471.7% | +332.5% | +74.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +25.7% | +34.0% | +27.0% | +27.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — JPM and BAC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BAC is the less volatile stock with a 1.00 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TFC's 1.07 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.07x | 1.00x | 1.00x | 1.01x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $56.20 | $337.25 | $57.55 | $61.19 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $38.27 | $248.83 | $40.56 | $40.89 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.4% | +93.4% | +93.1% | +91.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.9 | 53.4 | 57.1 | 51.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 8.6M | 8.4M | 36.3M | 9.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — TFC and JPM and USB each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TFC as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", BAC as "Buy", USB as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 14.0% upside for BAC (target: $61) vs 7.6% for JPM (target: $339). For income investors, TFC offers the higher dividend yield at 4.10% vs JPM's 1.63%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $57.56 | $338.78 | $61.13 | $63.82 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 54 | 61 | 54 | 49 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +4.1% | +1.6% | +2.4% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 10 | 14 | 6 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.08 | $5.13 | $1.27 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.6% | +3.4% | +5.3% | 0.0% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). USB leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
TFC vs JPM vs BAC vs USB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TFC or JPM or BAC or USB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger pick with 14. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -19. 0% for Truist Financial Corporation (TFC). U. S. Bancorp (USB) offers the better valuation at 12. 2x trailing P/E (11. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Truist Financial Corporation (TFC) a "Buy" — based on 54 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 — TFC or JPM or BAC or USB?
On trailing P/E, U.
S. Bancorp (USB) is the cheapest at 12. 2x versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. at 15. 9x. On forward P/E, U. S. Bancorp is actually cheaper at 11. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Bank of America Corporation wins at 0. 78x versus U. S. Bancorp's 1. 29x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TFC or JPM or BAC or USB?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +110. 3%, compared to -0. 1% for Truist Financial Corporation (TFC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +471. 7% versus USB's +74. 4%. 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 — TFC or JPM or BAC or USB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
00β versus Truist Financial Corporation's 1. 07β — meaning TFC is approximately 8% more volatile than BAC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Truist Financial Corporation (TFC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 98% versus 2% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TFC or JPM or BAC or USB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is pulling ahead at 14. 6% versus -19. 0% for Truist Financial Corporation (TFC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Truist Financial Corporation grew EPS 408. 3% year-over-year, compared to 18. 6% for Bank of America Corporation. 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 — TFC or JPM or BAC or USB?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 21. 6% net margin versus 16. 2% for Bank of America Corporation — meaning it keeps 21. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 27. 7% versus -2. 5% for TFC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — USB leads at 62. 8%, 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 TFC or JPM or BAC or USB 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, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 78x versus U. S. Bancorp's 1. 29x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, U. S. Bancorp (USB) trades at 11. 0x forward P/E versus 14. 2x for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — 3. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BAC: 14. 0% to $61. 13.
08Which pays a better dividend — TFC or JPM or BAC or USB?
In this comparison, TFC (4.
1% yield), BAC (2. 4% yield), JPM (1. 6% yield) pay a dividend. USB does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TFC or JPM or BAC or USB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 00), 1. 6% yield, +471. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +471. 7%, USB: +74. 4%), 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 TFC and JPM and BAC and USB?
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.
TFC, JPM, BAC pay a dividend while USB 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.