Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TFSL vs HOMB vs WAFD vs CVBF vs BANR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
TFSL vs HOMB vs WAFD vs CVBF vs BANR — 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 | $4.24B | $5.27B | $2.72B | $2.76B | $2.22B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $792M | $1.45B | $1.41B | $643M | $819M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $91M | $458M | $243M | $209M | $195M |
| Gross Margin | 40.3% | 65.6% | 50.9% | 79.9% | 79.0% |
| Operating Margin | 14.5% | 36.0% | 20.5% | 43.8% | 29.5% |
| Forward P/E | 45.1x | 10.8x | 10.9x | 14.1x | 10.5x |
| Total Debt | $4.90B | $1.20B | $1.82B | $991M | $373M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $429M | $910M | $657M | $108M | $183M |
TFSL vs HOMB vs WAFD vs CVBF vs BANR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| TFS Financial Corpo… (TFSL) | 100 | 98.0 | -2.0% |
| Home Bancshares, In… (HOMB) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| WaFd, Inc. (WAFD) | 100 | 137.5 | +37.5% |
| CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) | 100 | 104.2 | +4.2% |
| Banner Corporation (BANR) | 100 | 174.8 | +74.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TFSL vs HOMB vs WAFD vs CVBF vs BANR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TFSL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 4.4%, EPS growth 14.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.74, current ratio 0.05x
- Beta 0.74, yield 1.4%, current ratio 0.05x
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BANR's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
HOMB is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if bank quality is your priority.
- NIM 3.8% vs TFSL's 1.7%
- 9.5% NII/revenue growth vs CVBF's -2.3%
- 2.8% yield, 21-year raise streak, vs CVBF's 4.0%
WAFD ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 7 yrs, beta 0.79, yield 3.0%
- +26.1% vs HOMB's -3.9%
Among these 5 stocks, CVBF doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
BANR is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 101.4% 10Y total return vs WAFD's 83.9%
- PEG 0.91 vs TFSL's 34.70
- Lower P/E (10.5x vs 14.1x), PEG 0.91 vs 4.44
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.5% NII/revenue growth vs CVBF's -2.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.5x vs 14.1x), PEG 0.91 vs 4.44 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BANR's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.74 vs CVBF's 0.92 | |
| Dividends | 2.8% yield, 21-year raise streak, vs CVBF's 4.0% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +26.1% vs HOMB's -3.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs BANR's 0.5% |
TFSL vs HOMB vs WAFD vs CVBF vs BANR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
TFSL vs HOMB vs WAFD vs CVBF vs BANR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BANR leads in 2 of 6 categories
CVBF leads 1 • TFSL leads 0 • HOMB leads 0 • WAFD leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CVBF leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HOMB is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.5B annually — 2.3x CVBF's $643M. CVBF is the more profitable business, keeping 32.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TFSL's 11.5%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $792M | $1.5B | $1.4B | $643M | $819M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $133M | $601M | $277M | $294M | $253M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $91M | $458M | $243M | $209M | $195M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $83M | $354M | $226M | $217M | $248M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +40.3% | +65.6% | +50.9% | +79.9% | +79.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +14.5% | +36.0% | +20.5% | +43.8% | +29.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.5% | +27.7% | +16.0% | +32.5% | +23.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +9.0% | +29.1% | +14.8% | +33.8% | +30.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -0.5% | +26.0% | +46.3% | +11.1% | +11.2% |
Valuation Metrics
BANR leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.6x trailing earnings, BANR trades at a 75% valuation discount to TFSL's 47.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BANR offers better value at 1.00x vs TFSL's 36.32x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.2B | $5.3B | $2.7B | $2.8B | $2.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $8.7B | $5.6B | $3.9B | $3.6B | $2.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 47.19x | 13.31x | 13.52x | 13.38x | 11.64x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 45.07x | 10.83x | 10.89x | 14.12x | 10.51x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 36.32x | 4.37x | 4.39x | 4.21x | 1.00x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 63.21x | 10.08x | 12.95x | 12.93x | 9.56x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 5.35x | 3.63x | 1.93x | 4.29x | 2.71x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.23x | 1.35x | 0.94x | 1.20x | 1.16x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 59.70x | 12.48x | 13.05x | 12.70x | 8.97x |
Profitability & Efficiency
BANR leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HOMB delivers a 10.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $5 for TFSL. BANR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.19x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TFSL's 2.59x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HOMB scores 7/9 vs CVBF's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +4.8% | +10.9% | +8.0% | +9.3% | +10.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.5% | +2.0% | +1.0% | +1.4% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.3% | +7.2% | +3.9% | +6.8% | +7.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.7% | +9.8% | +5.7% | +9.3% | +10.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.59x | 0.30x | 0.60x | 0.43x | 0.19x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.5B | $292M | $1.2B | $883M | $190M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $429M | $910M | $657M | $108M | $183M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.9B | $1.2B | $1.8B | $991M | $373M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.24x | 1.44x | 0.48x | 2.12x | 1.11x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — CVBF and BANR each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BANR five years ago would be worth $13,109 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,426 for TFSL. Over the past 12 months, WAFD leads with a +26.1% total return vs HOMB's -3.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CVBF at 24.4% vs HOMB's 12.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +13.4% | -3.4% | +11.5% | +10.0% | +6.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +20.8% | -3.9% | +26.1% | +9.7% | +7.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +57.4% | +41.5% | +51.1% | +92.5% | +61.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.3% | +8.6% | +23.0% | +12.8% | +31.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +37.8% | +57.7% | +83.9% | +66.5% | +101.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.3% | +12.3% | +14.8% | +24.4% | +17.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TFSL and WAFD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TFSL is the less volatile stock with a 0.74 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CVBF's 0.92 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WAFD currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs HOMB's 86.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.74x | 0.81x | 0.79x | 0.92x | 0.79x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $15.58 | $30.83 | $36.12 | $21.48 | $69.83 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $12.54 | $25.68 | $26.31 | $17.95 | $57.05 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.9% | +86.8% | +98.4% | +94.6% | +94.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.1 | 48.1 | 68.6 | 55.5 | 54.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 730K | 1.5M | 657K | 1.6M | 288K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — HOMB and CVBF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TFSL as "Hold", HOMB as "Hold", WAFD as "Hold", CVBF as "Hold", BANR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 21.7% upside for CVBF (target: $25) vs -1.5% for WAFD (target: $35). For income investors, CVBF offers the higher dividend yield at 4.02% vs TFSL's 1.41%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $15.00 | $32.00 | $35.00 | $24.75 | $70.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 19 | 11 | 16 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.4% | +2.8% | +3.0% | +4.0% | +3.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 11 | 21 | 7 | 4 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.21 | $0.75 | $1.05 | $0.82 | $1.96 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +1.6% | +3.8% | +2.9% | +1.6% |
BANR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). CVBF leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 3 tied.
TFSL vs HOMB vs WAFD vs CVBF vs BANR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TFSL or HOMB or WAFD or CVBF or BANR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Home Bancshares, Inc.
(HOMB) is the stronger pick with 9. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 3% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). Banner Corporation (BANR) offers the better valuation at 11. 6x trailing P/E (10. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate TFS Financial Corporation (TFSL) a "Hold" — based on 4 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 — TFSL or HOMB or WAFD or CVBF or BANR?
On trailing P/E, Banner Corporation (BANR) is the cheapest at 11.
6x versus TFS Financial Corporation at 47. 2x. On forward P/E, Banner Corporation is actually cheaper at 10. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Banner Corporation wins at 0. 91x versus TFS Financial Corporation's 34. 70x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TFSL or HOMB or WAFD or CVBF or BANR?
Over the past 5 years, Banner Corporation (BANR) delivered a total return of +31.
1%, compared to +4. 3% for TFS Financial Corporation (TFSL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BANR returned +101. 4% versus TFSL's +37. 8%. 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 — TFSL or HOMB or WAFD or CVBF or BANR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), TFS Financial Corporation (TFSL) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
74β versus CVB Financial Corp. 's 0. 92β — meaning CVBF is approximately 24% more volatile than TFSL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Banner Corporation (BANR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 19% versus 3% for TFS Financial Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TFSL or HOMB or WAFD or CVBF or BANR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Home Bancshares, Inc.
(HOMB) is pulling ahead at 9. 5% versus -2. 3% for CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Banner Corporation grew EPS 15. 6% year-over-year, compared to 3. 6% for Home Bancshares, 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 — TFSL or HOMB or WAFD or CVBF or BANR?
CVB Financial Corp.
(CVBF) is the more profitable company, earning 32. 5% net margin versus 11. 5% for TFS Financial Corporation — meaning it keeps 32. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CVBF leads at 43. 8% versus 14. 5% for TFSL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CVBF leads at 79. 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 TFSL or HOMB or WAFD or CVBF or BANR 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, Banner Corporation (BANR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 91x versus TFS Financial Corporation's 34. 70x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Banner Corporation (BANR) trades at 10. 5x forward P/E versus 45. 1x for TFS Financial Corporation — 34. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CVBF: 21. 7% to $24. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — TFSL or HOMB or WAFD or CVBF or BANR?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
CVB Financial Corp. (CVBF) offers the highest yield at 4. 0%, versus 1. 4% for TFS Financial Corporation (TFSL).
09Is TFSL or HOMB or WAFD or CVBF or BANR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, TFS Financial Corporation (TFSL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
74), 1. 4% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TFSL: +37. 8%, CVBF: +66. 5%), 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 TFSL and HOMB and WAFD and CVBF and BANR?
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: TFSL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HOMB is a small-cap deep-value stock; WAFD is a small-cap deep-value stock; CVBF is a small-cap deep-value stock; BANR is a small-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.