Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs IBCP vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Banks - Regional
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs IBCP vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $774M | $2.52B | $2.70B | $4.50B | $730M | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $330M | $902M | $1.16B | $1.89B | $310M | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $27M | $169M | $224M | $392M | $69M | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 70.6% | 73.6% | 64.7% | 67.4% | 69.1% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 10.7% | 24.3% | 24.2% | 25.7% | 26.2% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 10.3x | 11.5x | 11.8x | 11.5x | 10.0x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $441M | $327M | $1.12B | $1.30B | $117M | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $67M | $185M | $668M | $271M | $52M | $10.27B |
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs IBCP vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alerus Financial Co… (ALRS) | 100 | 153.3 | +53.3% |
| NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) | 100 | 156.6 | +56.6% |
| Trustmark Corporati… (TRMK) | 100 | 187.2 | +87.2% |
| Fulton Financial Co… (FULT) | 100 | 221.8 | +121.8% |
| Independent Bank Co… (IBCP) | 100 | 238.9 | +138.9% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs IBCP vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ALRS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +44.4% vs IBCP's +16.4%
NBTB is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.76, yield 3.0%
TRMK is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 3.4% vs NBTB's 3.1%
- 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs ALRS's -3.1%
FULT has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 5.0%, EPS growth 32.5%
- PEG 0.82 vs KO's 2.26
- Lower P/E (11.5x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.82 vs 2.26
- 3.3% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%
IBCP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 194.4% 10Y total return vs KO's 121.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.72, Low D/E 23.2%, current ratio 370.62x
- Beta 0.72, yield 2.9%, current ratio 370.62x
- Beta 0.72 vs FULT's 0.99, lower leverage
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 27.8% margin vs ALRS's 8.2%
- 13.1% ROA vs ALRS's 0.5%, ROIC 15.8% vs 1.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 34.8% NII/revenue growth vs ALRS's -3.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.5x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.82 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs ALRS's 8.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.72 vs FULT's 0.99, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.3% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +44.4% vs IBCP's +16.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs ALRS's 0.5%, ROIC 15.8% vs 1.9% |
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs IBCP vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs IBCP vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IBCP leads in 1 of 6 categories
KO leads 1 • ALRS leads 0 • NBTB leads 0 • TRMK leads 0 • FULT leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ALRS and KO each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 159.1x IBCP's $310M. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ALRS's 8.2%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $330M | $902M | $1.2B | $1.9B | $310M | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $49M | $241M | $323M | $529M | $89M | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $27M | $169M | $224M | $392M | $69M | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $95M | $225M | $230M | $267M | $70M | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.6% | +73.6% | +64.7% | +67.4% | +69.1% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.7% | +24.3% | +24.2% | +25.7% | +26.2% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +8.2% | +18.8% | +19.3% | +20.7% | +22.1% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +28.9% | +24.9% | +19.8% | +14.1% | +22.6% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +73.1% | +39.5% | +5.4% | +47.2% | +2.3% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
IBCP leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.9x trailing earnings, IBCP trades at a 76% valuation discount to ALRS's 44.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FULT offers better value at 0.80x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $774M | $2.5B | $2.7B | $4.5B | $730M | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $2.7B | $3.2B | $5.5B | $795M | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 44.56x | 14.47x | 12.41x | 11.23x | 10.85x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.33x | 11.54x | 11.75x | 11.49x | 9.99x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.06x | 1.54x | 0.80x | 2.06x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 28.78x | 11.03x | 9.67x | 10.43x | 9.78x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.36x | 2.90x | 2.41x | 2.38x | 2.32x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.38x | 1.29x | 1.31x | 1.23x | 1.47x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 13.16x | 11.49x | 11.65x | 15.81x | 10.41x | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $5 for ALRS. NBTB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IBCP scores 8/9 vs ALRS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +4.9% | +9.5% | +10.8% | +11.6% | +14.2% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.5% | +1.1% | +1.2% | +1.2% | +1.3% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.9% | +7.9% | +7.1% | +7.5% | +10.2% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.8% | +2.4% | +3.2% | +9.5% | +2.6% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.78x | 0.17x | 0.53x | 0.37x | 0.23x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $373M | $142M | $448M | $1.0B | $65M | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $67M | $185M | $668M | $271M | $52M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $441M | $327M | $1.1B | $1.3B | $117M | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.35x | 1.05x | 0.75x | 0.84x | 0.91x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — ALRS and TRMK and IBCP each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IBCP five years ago would be worth $18,086 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,474 for ALRS. Over the past 12 months, ALRS leads with a +44.4% total return vs IBCP's +16.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TRMK at 29.2% vs KO's 13.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +35.9% | +17.6% | +18.7% | +21.0% | +12.0% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +44.4% | +18.3% | +35.5% | +37.8% | +16.4% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +79.7% | +48.5% | +115.6% | +96.0% | +110.4% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.7% | +44.4% | +56.8% | +61.1% | +80.9% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +106.8% | +108.5% | +127.3% | +114.2% | +194.4% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +21.6% | +14.1% | +29.2% | +25.1% | +28.1% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ALRS and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FULT's 0.99 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ALRS currently trades 99.8% from its 52-week high vs IBCP's 90.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.79x | 0.76x | 0.82x | 0.99x | 0.72x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $30.35 | $48.27 | $46.03 | $23.48 | $39.16 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $20.26 | $39.20 | $33.39 | $16.60 | $29.63 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.8% | +99.8% | +99.7% | +99.5% | +90.6% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 71.4 | 63.1 | 60.1 | 68.1 | 61.2 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 154K | 266K | 330K | 1.7M | 135K | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FULT and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ALRS as "Hold", NBTB as "Hold", TRMK as "Hold", FULT as "Hold", IBCP as "Hold", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 7.1% upside for IBCP (target: $38) vs -5.1% for ALRS (target: $29). For income investors, FULT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.30% vs TRMK's 2.10%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $28.75 | $46.00 | $45.50 | $23.50 | $38.00 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 10 | 9 | 20 | 7 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.7% | +3.0% | +2.1% | +3.3% | +2.9% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 33 | 13 | 1 | 5 | 11 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.81 | $1.43 | $0.97 | $0.77 | $1.03 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +0.4% | +3.0% | +1.5% | +1.7% | +0.2% |
IBCP leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). KO leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 4 tied.
ALRS vs NBTB vs TRMK vs FULT vs IBCP vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or IBCP or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is the stronger pick with 34.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for Alerus Financial Corporation (ALRS). Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) offers the better valuation at 10. 9x trailing P/E (10. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Coca-Cola Company (KO) a "Buy" — based on 48 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 — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or IBCP or KO?
On trailing P/E, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) is the cheapest at 10.
9x versus Alerus Financial Corporation at 44. 6x. On forward P/E, Independent Bank Corporation is actually cheaper at 10. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Fulton Financial Corporation wins at 0. 82x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or IBCP or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) delivered a total return of +80.
9%, compared to +4. 7% for Alerus Financial Corporation (ALRS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IBCP returned +194. 4% versus ALRS's +106. 8%. 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 — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or IBCP or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Fulton Financial Corporation's 0. 99β — meaning FULT is approximately -593% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NBT Bancorp Inc. (NBTB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or IBCP or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Trustmark Corporation (TRMK) is pulling ahead at 34.
8% versus -3. 1% for Alerus Financial Corporation (ALRS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fulton Financial Corporation grew EPS 32. 5% year-over-year, compared to -18. 1% for Alerus Financial 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 — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or IBCP or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 5. 3% for Alerus Financial Corporation — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 6. 9% for ALRS. 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 ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or IBCP or KO 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, Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 82x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Independent Bank Corporation (IBCP) trades at 10. 0x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 15. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IBCP: 7. 1% to $38. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or IBCP or KO?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Fulton Financial Corporation (FULT) offers the highest yield at 3. 3%, versus 2. 1% for Trustmark Corporation (TRMK).
09Is ALRS or NBTB or TRMK or FULT or IBCP or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, FULT: +114. 2%), 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 ALRS and NBTB and TRMK and FULT and IBCP and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (ALRS (Financial Services) and NBTB (Financial Services) and TRMK (Financial Services) and FULT (Financial Services) and IBCP (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ALRS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NBTB is a small-cap deep-value stock; TRMK is a small-cap high-growth stock; FULT is a small-cap deep-value stock; IBCP is a small-cap deep-value stock; KO is a large-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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.