Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TSBK vs CFFN vs CZWI vs KRNY vs NBTB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
TSBK vs CFFN vs CZWI vs KRNY vs NBTB — 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 | $327M | $1.02B | $203M | $508M | $2.35B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $110M | $417M | $90M | $344M | $867M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $31M | $73M | $14M | $32M | $169M |
| Gross Margin | 70.1% | 47.3% | 54.7% | 44.1% | 72.1% |
| Operating Margin | 32.8% | 19.9% | 7.0% | 9.0% | 25.3% |
| Forward P/E | 17.8x | 11.8x | 11.8x | 12.9x | 10.8x |
| Total Debt | $23M | $1.95B | $52M | $1.26B | $327M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $251M | $252M | $119M | $167M | $185M |
TSBK vs CFFN vs CZWI vs KRNY vs NBTB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timberland Bancorp,… (TSBK) | 100 | 230.6 | +130.6% |
| Capitol Federal Fin… (CFFN) | 100 | 66.7 | -33.3% |
| Citizens Community … (CZWI) | 100 | 286.8 | +186.8% |
| Kearny Financial Co… (KRNY) | 100 | 94.3 | -5.7% |
| NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) | 100 | 143.9 | +43.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TSBK vs CFFN vs CZWI vs KRNY vs NBTB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TSBK is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and bank quality.
- 250.8% 10Y total return vs CZWI's 157.0%
- NIM 3.5% vs KRNY's 1.7%
CFFN has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 10.0%, EPS growth 79.3%
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs CZWI's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs CZWI's 0.5%
CZWI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.46, Low D/E 27.6%, current ratio 3015.31x
- Beta 0.46, yield 1.8%, current ratio 3015.31x
- Beta 0.46 vs CFFN's 1.01, lower leverage
- +45.6% vs NBTB's +9.0%
KRNY is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 5.5% yield, vs NBTB's 3.2%
NBTB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 3.2%
- PEG 1.53 vs CFFN's 5.80
- 10.4% NII/revenue growth vs CZWI's -9.4%
- Lower P/E (10.8x vs 11.8x), PEG 1.53 vs 2.32
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.4% NII/revenue growth vs CZWI's -9.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.8x vs 11.8x), PEG 1.53 vs 2.32 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs CZWI's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.46 vs CFFN's 1.01, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 5.5% yield, vs NBTB's 3.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +45.6% vs NBTB's +9.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs CZWI's 0.5% |
TSBK vs CFFN vs CZWI vs KRNY vs NBTB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TSBK vs CFFN vs CZWI vs KRNY vs NBTB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TSBK leads in 2 of 6 categories
NBTB leads 1 • CZWI leads 1 • CFFN leads 0 • KRNY leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TSBK leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NBTB is the larger business by revenue, generating $867M annually — 9.6x CZWI's $90M. TSBK is the more profitable business, keeping 26.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to KRNY's 7.6%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $110M | $417M | $90M | $344M | $867M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $40M | $97M | $9M | $43M | $241M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $31M | $73M | $14M | $32M | $169M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $40M | $61M | $11M | $40M | $225M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.1% | +47.3% | +54.7% | +44.1% | +72.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +32.8% | +19.9% | +7.0% | +9.0% | +25.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +26.4% | +16.3% | +16.0% | +7.6% | +19.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +25.7% | +11.9% | +11.5% | +6.2% | +25.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +20.9% | +33.3% | +63.0% | +50.0% | +39.5% |
Valuation Metrics
NBTB leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.3x trailing earnings, TSBK trades at a 41% valuation discount to KRNY's 19.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NBTB offers better value at 1.92x vs CFFN's 7.36x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $327M | $1.0B | $203M | $508M | $2.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $99M | $2.7B | $136M | $1.6B | $2.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 11.29x | 15.04x | 14.44x | 19.24x | 13.53x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 17.78x | 11.85x | 11.78x | 12.93x | 10.80x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.27x | 7.36x | 2.85x | — | 1.92x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 2.56x | 29.91x | 15.28x | 44.52x | 10.35x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.96x | 2.43x | 2.25x | 1.48x | 2.71x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.25x | 0.97x | 1.09x | 0.68x | 1.21x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.49x | 20.37x | 19.55x | 23.76x | 10.75x |
Profitability & Efficiency
TSBK leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TSBK delivers a 11.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $4 for KRNY. TSBK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.09x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CFFN's 1.86x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TSBK scores 8/9 vs CZWI's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +11.7% | +7.0% | +7.8% | +4.3% | +9.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.5% | +0.7% | +0.8% | +0.4% | +1.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.8% | +2.0% | +2.0% | +1.1% | +7.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.0% | +2.5% | +0.6% | +1.5% | +2.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.09x | 1.86x | 0.28x | 1.68x | 0.17x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$228M | $1.7B | -$67M | $1.1B | $142M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $251M | $252M | $119M | $167M | $185M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $23M | $2.0B | $52M | $1.3B | $327M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.19x | 0.41x | 0.16x | 0.22x | 1.05x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CZWI leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CZWI five years ago would be worth $17,124 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,946 for KRNY. Over the past 12 months, CZWI leads with a +45.6% total return vs NBTB's +9.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CZWI at 37.5% vs KRNY's 9.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +18.1% | +20.0% | +21.5% | +12.9% | +9.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +39.9% | +44.6% | +45.6% | +37.9% | +9.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +95.3% | +60.9% | +160.0% | +32.6% | +54.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +58.0% | -18.6% | +71.2% | -20.5% | +29.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +250.8% | +12.0% | +157.0% | -9.0% | +102.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +25.0% | +17.2% | +37.5% | +9.9% | +15.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CFFN and CZWI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CZWI is the less volatile stock with a 0.46 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CFFN's 1.01 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CFFN currently trades 98.2% from its 52-week high vs CZWI's 93.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.75x | 1.01x | 0.46x | 0.83x | 0.89x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $43.77 | $7.96 | $22.62 | $8.50 | $46.92 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $29.30 | $5.51 | $12.83 | $5.76 | $39.20 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.7% | +98.2% | +93.2% | +95.1% | +96.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.1 | 60.7 | 63.7 | 55.8 | 57.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 35K | 926K | 40K | 298K | 236K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KRNY and NBTB each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TSBK as "Buy", CFFN as "Hold", CZWI as "Buy", KRNY as "Hold", NBTB as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 17.6% upside for KRNY (target: $10) vs -10.5% for CFFN (target: $7). For income investors, KRNY offers the higher dividend yield at 5.45% vs CZWI's 1.76%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $7.00 | — | $9.50 | $46.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.5% | +4.4% | +1.8% | +5.5% | +3.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.02 | $0.34 | $0.37 | $0.44 | $1.43 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.8% | +0.4% | +3.1% | +0.1% | +0.4% |
TSBK leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NBTB leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
TSBK vs CFFN vs CZWI vs KRNY vs NBTB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TSBK or CFFN or CZWI or KRNY or NBTB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is the stronger pick with 10. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 4% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI). Timberland Bancorp, Inc. (TSBK) offers the better valuation at 11. 3x trailing P/E (17. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Timberland Bancorp, Inc. (TSBK) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — TSBK or CFFN or CZWI or KRNY or NBTB?
On trailing P/E, Timberland Bancorp, Inc.
(TSBK) is the cheapest at 11. 3x versus Kearny Financial Corp. at 19. 2x. On forward P/E, NBT Bancorp Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 8x — 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: NBT Bancorp Inc. wins at 1. 53x versus Capitol Federal Financial, Inc. 's 5. 80x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TSBK or CFFN or CZWI or KRNY or NBTB?
Over the past 5 years, Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc.
(CZWI) delivered a total return of +71. 2%, compared to -20. 5% for Kearny Financial Corp. (KRNY). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TSBK returned +250. 8% versus KRNY's -9. 0%. 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 — TSBK or CFFN or CZWI or KRNY or NBTB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc.
(CZWI) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 46β versus Capitol Federal Financial, Inc. 's 1. 01β — meaning CFFN is approximately 120% more volatile than CZWI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Timberland Bancorp, Inc. (TSBK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% versus 186% for Capitol Federal Financial, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TSBK or CFFN or CZWI or KRNY or NBTB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), NBT Bancorp Inc.
(NBTB) is pulling ahead at 10. 4% versus -9. 4% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Kearny Financial Corp. grew EPS 130. 2% year-over-year, compared to 9. 0% for Citizens Community Bancorp, 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 — TSBK or CFFN or CZWI or KRNY or NBTB?
Timberland Bancorp, Inc.
(TSBK) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 4% net margin versus 7. 6% for Kearny Financial Corp. — meaning it keeps 26. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TSBK leads at 32. 8% versus 7. 0% for CZWI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NBTB leads at 72. 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 TSBK or CFFN or CZWI or KRNY or NBTB 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, NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 53x versus Capitol Federal Financial, Inc. 's 5. 80x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) trades at 10. 8x forward P/E versus 17. 8x for Timberland Bancorp, Inc. — 7. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KRNY: 17. 6% to $9. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — TSBK or CFFN or CZWI or KRNY or NBTB?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Kearny Financial Corp. (KRNY) offers the highest yield at 5. 5%, versus 1. 8% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI).
09Is TSBK or CFFN or CZWI or KRNY or NBTB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc.
(CZWI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 46), 1. 8% yield, +157. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CZWI: +157. 0%, CFFN: +12. 0%), 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 TSBK and CFFN and CZWI and KRNY and NBTB?
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: TSBK is a small-cap deep-value stock; CFFN is a small-cap deep-value stock; CZWI is a small-cap deep-value stock; KRNY is a small-cap income-oriented stock; NBTB 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.