Banks - Regional
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
WF vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Credit Services
Financial - Credit Services
Information Technology Services
Information Technology Services
WF vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Financial - Credit Services | Financial - Credit Services | Information Technology Services | Information Technology Services |
| Market Cap | $16.62B | $616.45B | $443.44B | $24.47B | $30.38B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $28.18T | $40.00B | $32.79B | $10.89B | $21.09B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $3.12T | $22.24B | $15.57B | $382M | $3.20B |
| Gross Margin | 48.8% | 80.4% | 83.4% | 38.1% | 60.8% |
| Operating Margin | 14.7% | 60.0% | 59.2% | 17.5% | 24.4% |
| Forward P/E | 0.0x | 24.6x | 25.5x | 7.5x | 7.0x |
| Total Debt | $94.51T | $25.17B | $19.00B | $4.01B | $29.12B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $26.36T | $20.15B | $10.57B | $599M | $798M |
WF vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Woori Financial Gro… (WF) | 100 | 308.9 | +208.9% |
| Visa Inc. (V) | 100 | 164.6 | +64.6% |
| Mastercard Incorpor… (MA) | 100 | 166.5 | +66.5% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 34.0 | -66.0% |
| Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) | 100 | 53.2 | -46.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: WF vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
WF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.00 vs V's 1.55
- Lower P/E (0.0x vs 7.0x), PEG 0.00 vs 0.20
- 3.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs V's 0.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +86.3% vs FISV's -68.8%
V ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.68, yield 0.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.68, Low D/E 66.4%, current ratio 1.08x
- Beta 0.68, yield 0.7%, current ratio 1.08x
- 50.1% margin vs FIS's 3.5%
MA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 16.4%, EPS growth 18.9%
- 437.2% 10Y total return vs V's 329.1%
- 16.4% NII/revenue growth vs FISV's 3.6%
- Beta 0.67 vs WF's 0.97, lower leverage
FIS lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, FISV doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.4% NII/revenue growth vs FISV's 3.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.0x vs 7.0x), PEG 0.00 vs 0.20 | |
| Quality / Margins | 50.1% margin vs FIS's 3.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.67 vs WF's 0.97, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs V's 0.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +86.3% vs FISV's -68.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 29.5% ROA vs WF's 0.6%, ROIC 56.5% vs 2.5% |
WF vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
WF vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
WF leads in 2 of 6 categories
V leads 1 • MA leads 1 • FIS leads 0 • FISV leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
V leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WF is the larger business by revenue, generating $28.18T annually — 2586.7x FIS's $10.9B. V is the more profitable business, keeping 50.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FIS's 3.5%. On growth, FIS holds the edge at +8.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $28.18T | $40.0B | $32.8B | $10.9B | $21.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $4.93T | $27.6B | $21.6B | $3.8B | $7.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $3.12T | $22.2B | $15.6B | $382M | $3.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$775.1B | $21.2B | $17.7B | $2.8B | $4.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +48.8% | +80.4% | +83.4% | +38.1% | +60.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +14.7% | +60.0% | +59.2% | +17.5% | +24.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.7% | +50.1% | +45.6% | +3.5% | +15.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +23.8% | +53.9% | +51.6% | +26.1% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +8.2% | -2.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -23.7% | +35.3% | +21.2% | +92.3% | -29.1% |
Valuation Metrics
WF leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.6x trailing earnings, WF trades at a 88% valuation discount to FIS's 63.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FISV offers better value at 0.25x vs FIS's 2.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $16.6B | $616.4B | $443.4B | $24.5B | $30.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $63.6B | $621.5B | $451.9B | $27.9B | $58.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 7.61x | 31.50x | 30.32x | 63.00x | 8.96x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 0.01x | 24.59x | 25.55x | 7.54x | 7.01x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.38x | 1.99x | 1.44x | 2.58x | 0.25x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 17.71x | 24.65x | 22.00x | 7.66x | 6.63x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.86x | 15.41x | 13.52x | 2.29x | 1.43x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.73x | 16.66x | 58.07x | 1.76x | 1.21x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 3.60x | 28.57x | 26.22x | 9.97x | 7.00x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MA leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MA delivers a 2.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $2 in annual profit, vs $3 for FIS. FIS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.29x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WF's 2.77x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MA scores 9/9 vs FISV's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.8% | +58.9% | +2.1% | +2.7% | +12.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.6% | +22.7% | +29.5% | +1.1% | +4.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.5% | +29.2% | +56.5% | +6.0% | +8.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.2% | +36.2% | +64.4% | +6.6% | +10.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 9 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.77x | 0.66x | 2.45x | 0.29x | 1.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $68.16T | $5.0B | $8.4B | $3.4B | $28.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $26.36T | $20.2B | $10.6B | $599M | $798M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $94.51T | $25.2B | $19.0B | $4.0B | $29.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.29x | 26.72x | 27.23x | 4.64x | 6.39x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WF leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in WF five years ago would be worth $26,396 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,685 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, WF leads with a +86.3% total return vs FISV's -68.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WF at 40.5% vs FISV's -22.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +17.7% | -7.1% | -10.7% | -27.3% | -13.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +86.3% | -7.4% | -11.0% | -35.3% | -68.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +177.6% | +41.2% | +32.2% | -6.6% | -52.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +164.0% | +42.6% | +36.8% | -63.2% | -51.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +222.9% | +329.1% | +437.2% | -13.2% | +9.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +40.5% | +12.2% | +9.7% | -2.2% | -22.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — V and MA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MA is the less volatile stock with a 0.67 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than WF's 0.97 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. V currently trades 85.6% from its 52-week high vs FISV's 29.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.97x | 0.68x | 0.67x | 0.76x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $84.71 | $375.51 | $601.77 | $82.74 | $191.91 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $37.35 | $293.89 | $480.50 | $43.30 | $52.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +80.5% | +85.6% | +83.2% | +57.1% | +29.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.4 | 53.3 | 42.3 | 43.3 | 36.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 119K | 6.9M | 3.2M | 5.5M | 5.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — WF and V each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: WF as "Buy", V as "Buy", MA as "Buy", FIS as "Buy", FISV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.6% upside for FIS (target: $67) vs 12.8% for V (target: $362). For income investors, WF offers the higher dividend yield at 3.76% vs MA's 0.61%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $362.45 | $656.87 | $67.38 | $74.64 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 61 | 64 | 37 | 60 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.8% | +0.7% | +0.6% | +3.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 15 | 14 | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $3718.88 | $2.36 | $3.07 | $1.63 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.6% | +2.2% | +2.6% | 0.0% | +19.4% |
WF leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). V leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
WF vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is WF or V or MA or FIS or FISV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the stronger pick with 16.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 6% for Fiserv, Inc. (FISV). Woori Financial Group Inc. (WF) offers the better valuation at 7. 6x trailing P/E (0. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Woori Financial Group Inc. (WF) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — WF or V or MA or FIS or FISV?
On trailing P/E, Woori Financial Group Inc.
(WF) is the cheapest at 7. 6x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 63. 0x. On forward P/E, Woori Financial Group Inc. is actually cheaper at 0. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Woori Financial Group Inc. wins at 0. 00x versus Visa Inc. 's 1. 55x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — WF or V or MA or FIS or FISV?
Over the past 5 years, Woori Financial Group Inc.
(WF) delivered a total return of +164. 0%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MA returned +437. 2% versus FIS's -13. 2%. 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 — WF or V or MA or FIS or FISV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
67β versus Woori Financial Group Inc. 's 0. 97β — meaning WF is approximately 46% more volatile than MA 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 3% for Woori Financial Group Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — WF or V or MA or FIS or FISV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is pulling ahead at 16.
4% versus 3. 6% for Fiserv, Inc. (FISV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Mastercard Incorporated grew EPS 18. 9% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FISV leads at 6. 1% annualised revenue growth. 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 — WF or V or MA or FIS or FISV?
Visa Inc.
(V) is the more profitable company, earning 50. 1% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 50. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: V leads at 60. 0% versus 14. 7% for WF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MA leads at 83. 4%, 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 WF or V or MA or FIS or FISV 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, Woori Financial Group Inc. (WF) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 00x versus Visa Inc. 's 1. 55x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Woori Financial Group Inc. (WF) trades at 0. 0x forward P/E versus 25. 5x for Mastercard Incorporated — 25. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FIS: 42. 6% to $67. 38.
08Which pays a better dividend — WF or V or MA or FIS or FISV?
In this comparison, WF (3.
8% yield), FIS (3. 5% yield), V (0. 7% yield), MA (0. 6% yield) pay a dividend. FISV does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is WF or V or MA or FIS or FISV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
67), 0. 6% yield, +437. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MA: +437. 2%, FISV: +9. 7%), 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 WF and V and MA and FIS and FISV?
These companies operate in different sectors (WF (Financial Services) and V (Financial Services) and MA (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology) and FISV (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: WF is a mid-cap deep-value stock; V is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MA is a large-cap high-growth stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; FISV is a mid-cap deep-value stock. WF, V, MA, FIS pay a dividend while FISV does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.