Banks - Diversified
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
UBS vs MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Diversified
UBS vs MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Diversified | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $137.82B | $302.59B | $287.62B | $825.89B | $401.47B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $59.05B | $103.14B | $126.85B | $270.79B | $188.75B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $6.27B | $16.18B | $16.67B | $58.03B | $30.63B |
| Gross Margin | 63.6% | 55.6% | 41.1% | 58.6% | 55.4% |
| Operating Margin | 11.9% | 17.1% | 14.5% | 27.7% | 18.5% |
| Forward P/E | 13.6x | 16.0x | 15.6x | 13.8x | 11.9x |
| Total Debt | $356.12B | $360.49B | $616.93B | $751.15B | $365.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $209.86B | $75.74B | $182.09B | $469.32B | $231.84B |
UBS vs MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| UBS Group AG (UBS) | 100 | 415.0 | +315.0% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 430.3 | +330.3% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 471.2 | +371.2% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 314.8 | +214.8% |
| Bank of America Cor… (BAC) | 100 | 218.7 | +118.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: UBS vs MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
UBS plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
MS is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 7.3% 10Y total return vs GS's 5.3%
GS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 17.0%, EPS growth 77.3%
- 17.0% NII/revenue growth vs UBS's -20.4%
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs UBS's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- +70.6% vs JPM's +25.2%
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 2.3% vs UBS's 0.4%
BAC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 6 yrs, beta 1.00, yield 2.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.00, current ratio 0.42x
- PEG 0.77 vs UBS's 12.29
- Beta 1.00, yield 2.4%, current ratio 0.42x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 17.0% NII/revenue growth vs UBS's -20.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.9x vs 13.8x), PEG 0.77 vs 1.06 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs UBS's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.00 vs GS's 1.47, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.4% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.6% vs JPM's +25.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs UBS's 0.5% |
UBS vs MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
UBS vs MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
BAC leads 1 • GS leads 1 • UBS leads 0 • MS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $270.8B annually — 4.6x UBS's $59.1B. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 21.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UBS's 10.4%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $59.1B | $103.1B | $126.9B | $270.8B | $188.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $9.9B | $26.3B | $23.4B | $81.3B | $36.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $6.3B | $16.2B | $16.7B | $58.0B | $30.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $3.9B | -$6.7B | $15.8B | -$119.7B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +63.6% | +55.6% | +41.1% | +58.6% | +55.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.9% | +17.1% | +14.5% | +27.7% | +18.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.4% | +13.0% | +11.3% | +21.6% | +16.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -26.4% | -2.0% | -12.1% | -15.5% | +6.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +26.1% | +48.9% | +45.8% | +16.0% | +18.3% |
Valuation Metrics
BAC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.8x trailing earnings, BAC trades at a 42% valuation discount to MS's 23.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BAC offers better value at 0.90x vs UBS's 21.49x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $137.8B | $302.6B | $287.6B | $825.9B | $401.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $284.1B | $587.3B | $722.5B | $1.11T | $535.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 23.75x | 23.92x | 22.84x | 15.51x | 13.81x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.59x | 16.01x | 15.64x | 13.79x | 11.86x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 21.49x | 2.69x | 1.63x | 1.19x | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 29.75x | 25.81x | 34.75x | 13.34x | 14.63x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.33x | 2.93x | 2.27x | 3.05x | 2.13x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.62x | 2.91x | 2.53x | 2.56x | 1.31x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | 31.83x |
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 $7 for UBS. BAC carries lower financial leverage with a 1.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 5.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BAC scores 7/9 vs GS's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +7.0% | +14.6% | +12.6% | +16.1% | +10.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.4% | +1.2% | +0.9% | +1.3% | +0.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.2% | +2.9% | +1.9% | +5.4% | +3.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.1% | +3.8% | +3.6% | +8.2% | +4.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.94x | 3.42x | 5.06x | 2.18x | 1.21x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $146.3B | $284.7B | $434.8B | $281.8B | $134.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $209.9B | $75.7B | $182.1B | $469.3B | $231.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $356.1B | $360.5B | $616.9B | $751.1B | $365.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.33x | 0.44x | 0.31x | 0.74x | 0.44x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in UBS five years ago would be worth $30,472 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,630 for BAC. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +70.6% total return vs JPM's +25.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 43.5% vs BAC's 26.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -3.4% | +5.7% | +1.8% | -5.0% | -5.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +47.4% | +63.0% | +70.6% | +25.2% | +31.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +139.5% | +138.4% | +195.2% | +134.6% | +101.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +204.7% | +136.2% | +164.4% | +104.3% | +36.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +232.0% | +732.3% | +534.3% | +461.3% | +330.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +33.8% | +33.6% | +43.5% | +32.9% | +26.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MS 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 GS's 1.47 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MS currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs UBS's 90.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.17x | 1.37x | 1.47x | 1.00x | 1.00x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $49.36 | $194.83 | $984.70 | $337.25 | $57.55 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $30.36 | $118.20 | $547.74 | $248.83 | $40.86 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.0% | +97.6% | +94.0% | +90.8% | +91.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 68.0 | 66.0 | 59.5 | 59.4 | 59.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.7M | 5.4M | 2.0M | 8.3M | 36.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — JPM and BAC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: UBS as "Buy", MS as "Buy", GS as "Hold", JPM as "Buy", BAC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 15.9% upside for BAC (target: $61) vs -46.9% for UBS (target: $24). For income investors, BAC offers the higher dividend yield at 2.40% vs GS's 1.46%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $23.57 | $205.75 | $995.89 | $338.78 | $61.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 29 | 52 | 55 | 61 | 54 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.6% | +2.0% | +1.5% | +1.7% | +2.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | 11 | 12 | 14 | 6 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.72 | $3.81 | $13.48 | $5.13 | $1.27 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.1% | +1.4% | +3.5% | +3.5% | +5.3% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). BAC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
UBS vs MS vs GS vs JPM vs BAC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is UBS or MS or GS or JPM or BAC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is the stronger pick with 17. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -20. 4% for UBS Group AG (UBS). Bank of America Corporation (BAC) offers the better valuation at 13. 8x trailing P/E (11. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate UBS Group AG (UBS) a "Buy" — based on 29 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 — UBS or MS or GS or JPM or BAC?
On trailing P/E, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the cheapest at 13.
8x versus Morgan Stanley at 23. 9x. On forward P/E, Bank of America Corporation is actually cheaper at 11. 9x. 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. 77x versus UBS Group AG's 12. 29x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — UBS or MS or GS or JPM or BAC?
Over the past 5 years, UBS Group AG (UBS) delivered a total return of +204.
7%, compared to +36. 3% for Bank of America Corporation (BAC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +732. 3% versus UBS's +232. 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 — UBS or MS or GS or JPM or BAC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
00β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 47β — meaning GS is approximately 47% more volatile than BAC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 121% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — UBS or MS or GS or JPM or BAC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is pulling ahead at 17. 0% versus -20. 4% for UBS Group AG (UBS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 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 — UBS or MS or GS or JPM or BAC?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 21. 6% net margin versus 10. 4% for UBS Group AG — 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 11. 9% for UBS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UBS leads at 63. 6%, 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 UBS or MS or GS or JPM or BAC 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. 77x versus UBS Group AG's 12. 29x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) trades at 11. 9x forward P/E versus 16. 0x for Morgan Stanley — 4. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BAC: 15. 9% to $61. 13.
08Which pays a better dividend — UBS or MS or GS or JPM or BAC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Bank of America Corporation (BAC) offers the highest yield at 2. 4%, versus 1. 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS).
09Is UBS or MS or GS or JPM or BAC 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. 7% yield, +461. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +461. 3%, GS: +534. 3%), 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 UBS and MS and GS and JPM and BAC?
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: UBS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MS is a large-cap high-growth stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; BAC is a large-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.