Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TFSL vs ICE vs CME vs WAFD vs NDAQ
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Banks - Regional
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
TFSL vs ICE vs CME vs WAFD vs NDAQ — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges |
| Market Cap | $4.22B | $88.45B | $104.07B | $2.73B | $50.59B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $792M | $12.64B | $6.52B | $1.41B | $8.22B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $91M | $3.30B | $4.24B | $243M | $1.91B |
| Gross Margin | 40.3% | 61.9% | 86.1% | 50.9% | 47.9% |
| Operating Margin | 14.5% | 38.7% | 64.9% | 20.5% | 28.4% |
| Forward P/E | 45.6x | 19.5x | 23.5x | 10.9x | 22.6x |
| Total Debt | $4.90B | $20.28B | $3.76B | $1.82B | $9.93B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $429M | $837M | $4.42B | $657M | $814M |
TFSL vs ICE vs CME vs WAFD vs NDAQ — 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 | 97.7 | -2.3% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 160.6 | +60.6% |
| CME Group Inc. (CME) | 100 | 157.1 | +57.1% |
| WaFd, Inc. (WAFD) | 100 | 137.9 | +37.9% |
| Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ) | 100 | 225.4 | +125.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TFSL vs ICE vs CME vs WAFD vs NDAQ
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, TFSL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ICE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.33, yield 1.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.33, Low D/E 69.9%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.33, yield 1.2%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.33 vs WAFD's 0.81
CME is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.71 vs TFSL's 35.11
- 3.8% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.2%
WAFD is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if bank quality is your priority.
- NIM 2.5% vs TFSL's 1.7%
- Lower P/E (10.9x vs 22.6x)
- +28.5% vs ICE's -10.4%
NDAQ carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 11.1%, EPS growth 60.1%
- 347.6% 10Y total return vs CME's 284.9%
- 11.1% NII/revenue growth vs WAFD's -1.6%
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs WAFD's 0.3% (lower = leaner)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.1% NII/revenue growth vs WAFD's -1.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.9x vs 22.6x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs WAFD's 0.3% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs WAFD's 0.81 | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +28.5% vs ICE's -10.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs WAFD's 0.3% |
TFSL vs ICE vs CME vs WAFD vs NDAQ — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
TFSL vs ICE vs CME vs WAFD vs NDAQ — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CME leads in 1 of 6 categories
WAFD leads 1 • TFSL leads 0 • ICE leads 0 • NDAQ leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CME leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.6B annually — 16.0x TFSL's $792M. CME is the more profitable business, keeping 62.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TFSL's 11.5%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $792M | $12.6B | $6.5B | $1.4B | $8.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $133M | $6.5B | $4.7B | $277M | $3.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $91M | $3.3B | $4.2B | $243M | $1.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $83M | $4.3B | $4.4B | $226M | $2.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +40.3% | +61.9% | +86.1% | +50.9% | +47.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +14.5% | +38.7% | +64.9% | +20.5% | +28.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.5% | +26.1% | +62.0% | +16.0% | +21.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +9.0% | +33.9% | +64.3% | +14.8% | +24.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -0.5% | +23.1% | +21.4% | +46.3% | +33.8% |
Valuation Metrics
WAFD leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.6x trailing earnings, WAFD trades at a 71% valuation discount to TFSL's 47.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CME offers better value at 1.87x vs TFSL's 36.20x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.2B | $88.4B | $104.1B | $2.7B | $50.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $8.7B | $107.9B | $103.4B | $3.9B | $59.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 47.03x | 27.06x | 25.70x | 13.56x | 28.80x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 45.61x | 19.48x | 23.49x | 10.93x | 22.65x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 36.20x | 3.05x | 1.87x | 4.41x | 2.70x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 63.11x | 16.71x | 22.96x | 12.98x | 20.14x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 5.33x | 7.00x | 15.96x | 1.93x | 6.16x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.22x | 3.08x | 3.60x | 0.94x | 4.19x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 59.50x | 20.62x | 24.82x | 13.09x | 25.44x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — CME and NDAQ each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NDAQ delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $5 for TFSL. CME carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TFSL's 2.59x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs CME's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +4.8% | +11.6% | +15.3% | +8.0% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.5% | +2.3% | +2.2% | +1.0% | +6.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.3% | +7.5% | +10.2% | +3.9% | +8.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.7% | +9.5% | +3.6% | +5.7% | +10.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 9 | 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.59x | 0.70x | 0.13x | 0.60x | 0.81x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.5B | $19.4B | -$666M | $1.2B | $9.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $429M | $837M | $4.4B | $657M | $814M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.9B | $20.3B | $3.8B | $1.8B | $9.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.24x | 6.53x | 41.55x | 0.48x | 14.11x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — CME and NDAQ each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NDAQ five years ago would be worth $17,036 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,349 for TFSL. Over the past 12 months, WAFD leads with a +28.5% total return vs ICE's -10.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CME at 19.7% vs ICE's 14.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +13.0% | -2.1% | +9.1% | +11.9% | -7.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +20.8% | -10.4% | +4.6% | +28.5% | +14.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +56.9% | +50.8% | +71.4% | +51.6% | +67.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +3.5% | +43.4% | +64.5% | +22.5% | +70.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +37.5% | +225.3% | +284.9% | +84.4% | +347.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.2% | +14.7% | +19.7% | +14.9% | +18.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CME and WAFD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CME is the less volatile stock with a -0.30 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than WAFD's 0.81 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WAFD currently trades 98.8% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 82.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.76x | 0.33x | -0.30x | 0.81x | 0.78x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $15.58 | $189.35 | $329.16 | $36.12 | $101.79 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $12.54 | $143.17 | $257.17 | $26.31 | $77.09 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.6% | +82.5% | +87.1% | +98.8% | +87.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.6 | 38.8 | 44.1 | 68.3 | 52.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 737K | 3.0M | 2.2M | 661K | 3.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ICE and CME each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TFSL as "Hold", ICE as "Buy", CME as "Hold", WAFD as "Hold", NDAQ as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 28.8% upside for NDAQ (target: $115) vs -1.9% for WAFD (target: $35). For income investors, CME offers the higher dividend yield at 3.81% vs NDAQ's 1.17%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $15.00 | $195.71 | $320.25 | $35.00 | $114.60 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 36 | 35 | 11 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.4% | +1.2% | +3.8% | +3.0% | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 11 | 14 | 6 | 7 | 13 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.21 | $1.93 | $10.92 | $1.05 | $1.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +1.6% | +0.3% | +3.7% | +1.2% |
CME leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). WAFD leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 4 tied.
TFSL vs ICE vs CME vs WAFD vs NDAQ: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TFSL or ICE or CME or WAFD or NDAQ a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Nasdaq, Inc.
(NDAQ) is the stronger pick with 11. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for WaFd, Inc. (WAFD). WaFd, Inc. (WAFD) offers the better valuation at 13. 6x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) a "Buy" — based on 36 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 ICE or CME or WAFD or NDAQ?
On trailing P/E, WaFd, Inc.
(WAFD) is the cheapest at 13. 6x versus TFS Financial Corporation at 47. 0x. On forward P/E, WaFd, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: CME Group Inc. wins at 1. 71x versus TFS Financial Corporation's 35. 11x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TFSL or ICE or CME or WAFD or NDAQ?
Over the past 5 years, Nasdaq, Inc.
(NDAQ) delivered a total return of +70. 4%, compared to +3. 5% for TFS Financial Corporation (TFSL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NDAQ returned +347. 6% versus TFSL's +37. 5%. 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 ICE or CME or WAFD or NDAQ?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 30β versus WaFd, Inc. 's 0. 81β — meaning WAFD is approximately -367% more volatile than CME relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CME Group Inc. (CME) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 3% for TFS Financial Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TFSL or ICE or CME or WAFD or NDAQ?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Nasdaq, Inc.
(NDAQ) is pulling ahead at 11. 1% versus -1. 6% for WaFd, Inc. (WAFD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Nasdaq, Inc. grew EPS 60. 1% year-over-year, compared to 5. 2% for WaFd, 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 ICE or CME or WAFD or NDAQ?
CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the more profitable company, earning 62. 0% net margin versus 11. 5% for TFS Financial Corporation — meaning it keeps 62. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CME leads at 64. 9% versus 14. 5% for TFSL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CME leads at 86. 1%, 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 ICE or CME or WAFD or NDAQ 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, CME Group Inc. (CME) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 71x versus TFS Financial Corporation's 35. 11x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, WaFd, Inc. (WAFD) trades at 10. 9x forward P/E versus 45. 6x for TFS Financial Corporation — 34. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NDAQ: 28. 8% to $114. 60.
08Which pays a better dividend — TFSL or ICE or CME or WAFD or NDAQ?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
CME Group Inc. (CME) offers the highest yield at 3. 8%, versus 1. 2% for Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ).
09Is TFSL or ICE or CME or WAFD or NDAQ better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 30), 3. 8% yield, +284. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CME: +284. 9%, WAFD: +84. 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 TFSL and ICE and CME and WAFD and NDAQ?
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; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CME is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; WAFD is a small-cap deep-value stock; NDAQ is a mid-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.
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.