Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CBFV vs BFST vs FIS vs FISV vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Information Technology Services
Information Technology Services
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
CBFV vs BFST vs FIS vs FISV vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Banks - Regional | Information Technology Services | Information Technology Services | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $190M | $956M | $20.26B | $28.76B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $69M | $512M | $11.66B | $21.09B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $5M | $88M | $2.67B | $3.20B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 62.5% | 60.9% | 37.6% | 60.8% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 7.7% | 22.2% | 17.9% | 24.4% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 12.6x | 9.8x | 6.2x | 6.6x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $35M | $551M | $4.01B | $29.12B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $32M | $411M | $599M | $798M | $10.27B |
CBFV vs BFST vs FIS vs FISV vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CB Financial Servic… (CBFV) | 100 | 171.9 | +71.9% |
| Business First Banc… (BFST) | 100 | 190.5 | +90.5% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 29.2 | -70.8% |
| Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) | 100 | 55.1 | -44.9% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CBFV vs BFST vs FIS vs FISV vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CBFV has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.41, yield 2.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.41, Low D/E 22.1%, current ratio 0.02x
- Beta 0.41 vs FISV's 0.87, lower leverage
- +34.6% vs FISV's -68.0%
BFST ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and bank quality.
- Rev growth 11.8%, EPS growth 23.0%
- NIM 3.3% vs CBFV's 3.3%
- 11.8% NII/revenue growth vs CBFV's -13.3%
FIS is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 0.61, yield 4.2%, current ratio 0.59x
- 4.2% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
FISV is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.19 vs KO's 2.26
- Lower P/E (6.6x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.19 vs 2.26
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 121.1% 10Y total return vs CBFV's 114.0%
- 27.8% margin vs CBFV's 7.1%
- 13.1% ROA vs CBFV's 0.3%, ROIC 15.8% vs 2.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.8% NII/revenue growth vs CBFV's -13.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.6x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.19 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs CBFV's 7.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.41 vs FISV's 0.87, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.2% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +34.6% vs FISV's -68.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs CBFV's 0.3%, ROIC 15.8% vs 2.1% |
CBFV vs BFST vs FIS vs FISV vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CBFV vs BFST vs FIS vs FISV vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories
FISV leads 1 • CBFV leads 1 • BFST leads 0 • FIS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 717.9x CBFV's $69M. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CBFV's 7.1%. On growth, FIS holds the edge at +30.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $69M | $512M | $11.7B | $21.1B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $7M | $119M | $4.1B | $7.5B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $5M | $88M | $2.7B | $3.2B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $17M | $88M | $2.8B | $4.0B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +62.5% | +60.9% | +37.6% | +60.8% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +7.7% | +22.2% | +17.9% | +24.4% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +7.1% | +17.2% | +22.9% | +15.2% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +24.8% | +17.1% | +23.9% | +19.0% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +30.1% | -2.0% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +93.5% | +39.2% | +30.6% | -29.1% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
FISV leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.5x trailing earnings, FISV trades at a 84% valuation discount to FIS's 52.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FISV offers better value at 0.24x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $190M | $956M | $20.3B | $28.8B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $193M | $1.1B | $23.7B | $57.1B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 40.78x | 10.52x | 52.27x | 8.48x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.62x | 9.78x | 6.24x | 6.62x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.94x | 2.14x | 0.24x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 27.19x | 9.20x | 6.50x | 6.44x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.77x | 1.87x | 1.90x | 1.36x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.26x | 0.97x | 1.46x | 1.14x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.09x | 10.38x | 7.21x | 6.63x | 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 $3 for CBFV. CBFV carries lower financial leverage with a 0.22x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BFST scores 7/9 vs FISV's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +3.2% | +10.2% | +18.4% | +12.4% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.3% | +1.1% | +7.5% | +4.0% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.1% | +6.2% | +6.0% | +8.1% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.9% | +8.9% | +6.6% | +10.2% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.22x | 0.61x | 0.29x | 1.13x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3M | $140M | $3.4B | $28.3B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $32M | $411M | $599M | $798M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $35M | $551M | $4.0B | $29.1B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.21x | 0.59x | 21.16x | 6.39x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CBFV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CBFV five years ago would be worth $19,369 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,267 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, CBFV leads with a +34.6% total return vs FISV's -68.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CBFV at 26.8% vs FISV's -23.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +9.8% | +14.1% | -38.9% | -18.0% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +34.6% | +23.9% | -49.4% | -68.0% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +103.8% | +97.0% | -18.9% | -54.3% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.7% | +38.7% | -67.3% | -50.7% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +114.0% | +31.2% | -25.6% | +1.8% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +26.8% | +25.4% | -6.8% | -23.0% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CBFV 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 FISV's 0.87 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CBFV currently trades 98.9% from its 52-week high vs FISV's 30.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.41x | 0.79x | 0.61x | 0.87x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $37.92 | $30.32 | $82.74 | $177.36 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $27.11 | $22.52 | $37.91 | $51.78 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.9% | +96.4% | +47.4% | +30.3% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 67.1 | 64.2 | 30.8 | 40.8 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4K | 175K | 5.6M | 5.7M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FIS and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CBFV as "Hold", BFST as "Buy", FIS as "Buy", FISV as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 60.4% upside for FIS (target: $63) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, FIS offers the higher dividend yield at 4.16% vs BFST's 1.94%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $32.33 | $62.88 | $71.15 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 3 | 4 | 37 | 60 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +1.9% | +4.2% | — | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 7 | 1 | — | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.97 | $0.57 | $1.63 | — | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.6% | +0.4% | +7.0% | +20.5% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). FISV leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
CBFV vs BFST vs FIS vs FISV vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CBFV or BFST or FIS or FISV or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Business First Bancshares, Inc.
(BFST) is the stronger pick with 11. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 3% for CB Financial Services, Inc. (CBFV). Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) offers the better valuation at 8. 5x trailing P/E (6. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Business First Bancshares, Inc. (BFST) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — CBFV or BFST or FIS or FISV or KO?
On trailing P/E, Fiserv, Inc.
(FISV) is the cheapest at 8. 5x 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: Fiserv, Inc. wins at 0. 19x 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 — CBFV or BFST or FIS or FISV or KO?
Over the past 5 years, CB Financial Services, Inc.
(CBFV) delivered a total return of +93. 7%, compared to -67. 3% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KO returned +121. 1% 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 — CBFV or BFST or FIS or FISV or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Fiserv, Inc. 's 0. 87β — meaning FISV is approximately -536% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CB Financial Services, Inc. (CBFV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 22% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CBFV or BFST or FIS or FISV or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Business First Bancshares, Inc.
(BFST) is pulling ahead at 11. 8% versus -13. 3% for CB Financial Services, Inc. (CBFV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to -61. 3% for CB Financial 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 — CBFV or BFST or FIS or FISV or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — 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 7. 7% for CBFV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CBFV leads at 62. 5%, 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 CBFV or BFST or FIS or FISV 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, Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 19x 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, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) trades at 6. 2x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 19. 0x 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 — CBFV or BFST or FIS or FISV or KO?
In this comparison, FIS (4.
2% yield), CBFV (2. 6% yield), KO (2. 5% yield), BFST (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. FISV does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CBFV or BFST or FIS or FISV 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%, FISV: +1. 8%), 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 CBFV and BFST and FIS and FISV and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (CBFV (Financial Services) and BFST (Financial Services) and FIS (Technology) and FISV (Technology) 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: CBFV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BFST is a small-cap deep-value stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; FISV is a mid-cap deep-value stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. CBFV, BFST, FIS, KO 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.