Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
USCB vs NDAQ vs ICE vs OCFC vs FIS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Banks - Regional
Information Technology Services
USCB vs NDAQ vs ICE vs OCFC vs FIS — 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 | Information Technology Services |
| Market Cap | $357M | $50.58B | $79.60B | $1.07B | $20.26B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $152M | $8.27B | $12.64B | $660M | $11.66B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $26M | $1.91B | $3.30B | $71M | $2.67B |
| Gross Margin | 58.1% | 54.8% | 61.9% | 54.8% | 37.6% |
| Operating Margin | 23.6% | 29.5% | 38.7% | 14.0% | 17.9% |
| Forward P/E | 9.8x | 22.6x | 17.3x | 9.7x | 6.2x |
| Total Debt | $91M | $9.93B | $20.28B | $1.63B | $4.01B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $82M | $814M | $837M | $135M | $599M |
USCB vs NDAQ vs ICE vs OCFC vs FIS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| USCB Financial Hold… (USCB) | 100 | 183.6 | +83.6% |
| Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ) | 100 | 143.0 | +43.0% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 117.3 | +17.3% |
| OceanFirst Financia… (OCFC) | 100 | 95.4 | -4.6% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 26.3 | -73.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: USCB vs NDAQ vs ICE vs OCFC vs FIS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
USCB is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 3.0% vs OCFC's 2.5%
- +20.6% vs FIS's -49.4%
NDAQ has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 11.1%, EPS growth 60.1%
- 344.3% 10Y total return vs USCB's 88.5%
- 11.1% NII/revenue growth vs OCFC's -4.7%
- 1.2% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs OCFC's 4.5%
ICE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.35, yield 1.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.35, Low D/E 69.9%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.35, yield 1.4%, current ratio 1.02x
- 26.1% margin vs OCFC's 10.7%
Among these 5 stocks, OCFC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
FIS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.26 vs OCFC's 3.48
- Lower P/E (6.2x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.26 vs 1.95
- 7.5% ROA vs OCFC's 0.5%, ROIC 6.0% vs 2.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.1% NII/revenue growth vs OCFC's -4.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.2x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.26 vs 1.95 | |
| Quality / Margins | 26.1% margin vs OCFC's 10.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs OCFC's 0.89, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.2% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs OCFC's 4.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +20.6% vs FIS's -49.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.5% ROA vs OCFC's 0.5%, ROIC 6.0% vs 2.2% |
USCB vs NDAQ vs ICE vs OCFC vs FIS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
USCB vs NDAQ vs ICE vs OCFC vs FIS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FIS leads in 2 of 6 categories
ICE leads 1 • USCB leads 1 • NDAQ leads 0 • OCFC leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICE 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 — 83.1x USCB's $152M. ICE is the more profitable business, keeping 26.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to OCFC's 10.7%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $152M | $8.3B | $12.6B | $660M | $11.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $36M | $3.1B | $6.5B | $103M | $4.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $26M | $1.9B | $3.3B | $71M | $2.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $43M | $2.0B | $4.3B | $80M | $2.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +58.1% | +54.8% | +61.9% | +54.8% | +37.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +23.6% | +29.5% | +38.7% | +14.0% | +17.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +17.2% | +23.1% | +26.1% | +10.7% | +22.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +27.9% | +24.2% | +33.9% | +12.0% | +23.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | +30.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -79.4% | +33.8% | +23.1% | -36.1% | +30.6% |
Valuation Metrics
FIS leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.0x trailing earnings, USCB trades at a 71% valuation discount to FIS's 52.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), USCB offers better value at 0.58x vs OCFC's 5.71x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $357M | $50.6B | $79.6B | $1.1B | $20.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $365M | $59.7B | $99.0B | $2.6B | $23.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.04x | 28.80x | 24.36x | 15.90x | 52.27x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.76x | 22.60x | 17.34x | 9.69x | 6.24x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.58x | 2.69x | 2.74x | 5.71x | 2.14x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.04x | 20.14x | 15.34x | 27.52x | 6.50x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.35x | 6.15x | 6.30x | 1.63x | 1.90x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.69x | 4.19x | 2.77x | 0.64x | 1.46x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.40x | 25.43x | 18.56x | 13.43x | 7.21x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FIS leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FIS delivers a 18.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $4 for OCFC. FIS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.29x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to OCFC's 0.98x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NDAQ scores 9/9 vs FIS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +11.9% | +15.9% | +11.6% | +4.3% | +18.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.0% | +6.4% | +2.3% | +0.5% | +7.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.8% | +8.1% | +7.5% | +2.2% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.8% | +10.2% | +9.5% | +2.7% | +6.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 9 | 9 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.43x | 0.81x | 0.70x | 0.98x | 0.29x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $8M | $9.1B | $19.4B | $1.5B | $3.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $82M | $814M | $837M | $135M | $599M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $91M | $9.9B | $20.3B | $1.6B | $4.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.58x | 14.11x | 6.53x | 0.33x | 21.16x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
USCB leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in USCB five years ago would be worth $18,854 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,267 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, USCB leads with a +20.6% total return vs FIS's -49.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors USCB at 25.5% vs FIS's -6.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +8.8% | -7.3% | -11.8% | +6.5% | -38.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +20.6% | +4.0% | -20.4% | +12.2% | -49.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +97.7% | +80.8% | +34.6% | +28.0% | -18.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +88.5% | +60.2% | +30.9% | +3.9% | -67.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +88.5% | +344.3% | +195.3% | +37.0% | -25.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +25.5% | +21.8% | +10.4% | +8.6% | -6.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — USCB and ICE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ICE is the less volatile stock with a 0.35 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than OCFC's 0.89 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. USCB currently trades 94.1% from its 52-week high vs FIS's 47.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.70x | 0.71x | 0.35x | 0.89x | 0.61x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $20.79 | $101.79 | $189.35 | $20.61 | $82.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.57 | $77.09 | $136.67 | $16.09 | $37.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.1% | +87.4% | +74.2% | +90.2% | +47.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 63.2 | 41.2 | 31.9 | 50.1 | 30.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 58K | 3.0M | 3.2M | 776K | 5.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NDAQ and OCFC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: USCB as "Buy", NDAQ as "Buy", ICE as "Buy", OCFC as "Hold", FIS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 60.4% upside for FIS (target: $63) vs 2.2% for OCFC (target: $19). For income investors, OCFC offers the higher dividend yield at 4.52% vs NDAQ's 1.17%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $24.00 | $113.83 | $194.00 | $19.00 | $62.88 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 3 | 36 | 36 | 8 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.2% | +1.2% | +1.4% | +4.5% | +4.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 14 | 13 | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.43 | $1.04 | $1.93 | $0.84 | $1.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +9.7% | +1.2% | +1.7% | +7.7% | +7.0% |
FIS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). ICE leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
USCB vs NDAQ vs ICE vs OCFC vs FIS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is USCB or NDAQ or ICE or OCFC or FIS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Nasdaq, Inc.
(NDAQ) is the stronger pick with 11. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 7% for OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC). USCB Financial Holdings, Inc. (USCB) offers the better valuation at 15. 0x trailing P/E (9. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate USCB Financial Holdings, Inc. (USCB) a "Buy" — based on 3 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 — USCB or NDAQ or ICE or OCFC or FIS?
On trailing P/E, USCB Financial Holdings, Inc.
(USCB) is the cheapest at 15. 0x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 52. 3x. On forward P/E, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 2x — 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: Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. wins at 0. 26x versus OceanFirst Financial Corp. 's 3. 48x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — USCB or NDAQ or ICE or OCFC or FIS?
Over the past 5 years, USCB Financial Holdings, Inc.
(USCB) delivered a total return of +88. 5%, compared to -67. 3% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NDAQ returned +344. 3% versus FIS's -25. 6%. 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 — USCB or NDAQ or ICE or OCFC or FIS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 35β versus OceanFirst Financial Corp. 's 0. 89β — meaning OCFC is approximately 153% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 29% versus 98% for OceanFirst Financial Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — USCB or NDAQ or ICE or OCFC or FIS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Nasdaq, Inc.
(NDAQ) is pulling ahead at 11. 1% versus -4. 7% for OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Nasdaq, Inc. grew EPS 60. 1% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, 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 — USCB or NDAQ or ICE or OCFC or FIS?
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 26. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus 14. 1% for OCFC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ICE leads at 61. 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 USCB or NDAQ or ICE or OCFC or FIS 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, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 26x versus OceanFirst Financial Corp. 's 3. 48x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) trades at 6. 2x forward P/E versus 22. 6x for Nasdaq, Inc. — 16. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 60. 4% to $62. 88.
08Which pays a better dividend — USCB or NDAQ or ICE or OCFC or FIS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
OceanFirst Financial Corp. (OCFC) offers the highest yield at 4. 5%, versus 1. 2% for Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ).
09Is USCB or NDAQ or ICE or OCFC or FIS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 35), 1. 4% yield, +195. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +195. 3%, OCFC: +37. 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 USCB and NDAQ and ICE and OCFC and FIS?
These companies operate in different sectors (USCB (Financial Services) and NDAQ (Financial Services) and ICE (Financial Services) and OCFC (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: USCB is a small-cap deep-value stock; NDAQ is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; OCFC is a small-cap deep-value stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.