Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
BVFL vs ICE vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
BVFL vs ICE vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $178M | $75.83B | $341.71B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $52M | $12.64B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $13M | $3.30B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 76.6% | 61.9% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 32.4% | 38.7% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 14.2x | 16.5x | 24.3x |
| Total Debt | $36M | $20.28B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $6M | $837M | $10.27B |
BVFL vs ICE vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BV Financial, Inc. (BVFL) | 100 | 127.1 | +27.1% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 146.2 | +46.2% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 177.7 | +77.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BVFL vs ICE vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BVFL is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 6.6%, EPS growth 30.0%
- 214.4% 10Y total return vs ICE's 192.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.44, Low D/E 19.5%, current ratio 4.18x
ICE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.38, yield 1.4%
- PEG 1.86 vs BVFL's 2.38
- Beta 0.38, yield 1.4%, current ratio 1.02x
KO has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in quality and dividends.
- 27.8% margin vs BVFL's 25.7%
- 2.6% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- 13.1% ROA vs BVFL's 1.5%, ROIC 15.8% vs 5.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 7.5% NII/revenue growth vs KO's 1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.2x vs 24.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs BVFL's 25.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.38 vs BVFL's 0.44 | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +42.2% vs ICE's -24.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs BVFL's 1.5%, ROIC 15.8% vs 5.5% |
BVFL vs ICE vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BVFL vs ICE vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BVFL leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 939.9x BVFL's $52M. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 27.8% (KO) to 25.7% (BVFL).
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $52M | $12.6B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $18M | $6.5B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $13M | $3.3B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $19M | $4.3B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +76.6% | +61.9% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +32.4% | +38.7% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +25.7% | +26.1% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +35.8% | +33.9% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.1% | +23.1% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
BVFL leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.2x trailing earnings, BVFL trades at a 46% valuation discount to KO's 26.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), KO offers better value at 2.34x vs ICE's 2.61x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $178M | $75.8B | $341.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $208M | $95.3B | $376.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 14.22x | 23.20x | 26.12x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 16.52x | 24.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.38x | 2.61x | 2.34x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.85x | 14.76x | 25.45x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.39x | 6.00x | 7.13x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.95x | 2.64x | 9.99x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.47x | 17.68x | 64.52x |
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 $7 for BVFL. BVFL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.19x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs KO's 7/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +7.0% | +11.6% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.5% | +2.3% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.5% | +7.5% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.9% | +9.5% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 9 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.19x | 0.70x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $30M | $19.4B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $6M | $837M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $36M | $20.3B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.33x | 6.53x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KO five years ago would be worth $16,528 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,313 for BVFL. Over the past 12 months, BVFL leads with a +42.2% total return vs ICE's -24.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KO at 11.7% vs BVFL's -0.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +11.9% | -15.7% | +16.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +42.2% | -24.4% | +17.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -0.3% | +24.3% | +39.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +13.1% | +26.4% | +65.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +214.4% | +192.5% | +115.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -0.1% | +7.5% | +11.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BVFL and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.23 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BVFL's 0.44 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BVFL currently trades 98.0% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 70.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.44x | 0.38x | -0.23x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $20.75 | $189.35 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $14.05 | $132.84 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.0% | +70.7% | +94.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.4 | 29.6 | 49.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 18K | 3.3M | 13.6M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ICE as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 44.9% upside for ICE (target: $194) vs 8.5% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.56% vs ICE's 1.45%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $194.00 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 36 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.4% | +2.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 13 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.93 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +16.9% | +1.8% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). BVFL leads in 2 (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
BVFL vs ICE vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BVFL or ICE or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the stronger pick with 7. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). BV Financial, Inc. (BVFL) offers the better valuation at 14. 2x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) a "Buy" — based on 36 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 — BVFL or ICE or KO?
On trailing P/E, BV Financial, Inc.
(BVFL) is the cheapest at 14. 2x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 26. 1x. On forward P/E, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. is actually cheaper at 16. 5x — 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: Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. wins at 1. 86x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 17x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BVFL or ICE or KO?
Over the past 5 years, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) delivered a total return of +65.
3%, compared to +13. 1% for BV Financial, Inc. (BVFL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BVFL returned +214. 4% versus KO's +115. 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 — BVFL or ICE or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
23β versus BV Financial, Inc. 's 0. 44β — meaning BVFL is approximately -290% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, BV Financial, Inc. (BVFL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 19% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BVFL or ICE or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is pulling ahead at 7. 5% versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: BV Financial, Inc. grew EPS 30. 0% year-over-year, compared to 20. 7% for Intercontinental Exchange, 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 — BVFL or ICE or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 25. 7% for BV Financial, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus 28. 7% for KO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BVFL leads at 76. 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 BVFL or ICE 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, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 86x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 17x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) trades at 16. 5x forward P/E versus 24. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 7. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 44. 9% to $194. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BVFL or ICE or KO?
In this comparison, KO (2.
6% yield), ICE (1. 4% yield) pay a dividend. BVFL does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BVFL or ICE 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.
23), 2. 6% yield, +115. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +115. 0%, BVFL: +214. 4%), 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 BVFL and ICE and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (BVFL (Financial Services) and ICE (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: BVFL is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. ICE, KO pay a dividend while BVFL 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.