Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CCBG vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Credit Services
Financial - Credit Services
Information Technology Services
Information Technology Services
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
CCBG vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs KO — 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 | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $808M | $618.49B | $433.74B | $20.26B | $28.76B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $279M | $43.03B | $33.94B | $11.66B | $21.09B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $62M | $22.24B | $15.57B | $2.67B | $3.20B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 87.1% | 81.3% | 83.0% | 37.6% | 60.8% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 30.0% | 61.1% | 59.4% | 17.9% | 24.4% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 13.0x | 24.5x | 24.9x | 6.2x | 6.6x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $93M | $25.17B | $19.00B | $4.01B | $29.12B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $62M | $20.15B | $10.57B | $599M | $798M | $10.27B |
CCBG vs V vs MA 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capital City Bank G… (CCBG) | 100 | 224.9 | +124.9% |
| Visa Inc. (V) | 100 | 166.9 | +66.9% |
| Mastercard Incorpor… (MA) | 100 | 165.7 | +65.7% |
| 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: CCBG vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CCBG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 257.8% 10Y total return vs MA's 440.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.56, Low D/E 16.9%, current ratio 1.24x
- Beta 0.56, yield 2.1%, current ratio 1.24x
- +27.9% vs FISV's -68.0%
V ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 18 yrs, beta 0.54, yield 0.7%
- 51.7% margin vs FISV's 15.2%
MA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 16.4%, EPS growth 18.9%
- 16.4% NII/revenue growth vs KO's 1.9%
- Beta 0.49 vs FISV's 0.87
- 29.5% ROA vs CCBG's 1.4%, ROIC 56.5% vs 10.3%
FIS is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 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 doesn't hold a clear category lead here; it's more of a secondary option in this specific comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.4% NII/revenue growth vs KO's 1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.6x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.19 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 51.7% margin vs FISV's 15.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.49 vs FISV's 0.87 | |
| Dividends | 4.2% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +27.9% vs FISV's -68.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 29.5% ROA vs CCBG's 1.4%, ROIC 56.5% vs 10.3% |
CCBG vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CCBG vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FISV leads in 1 of 6 categories
MA leads 1 • CCBG leads 1 • KO leads 1 • V leads 0 • FIS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — V and FIS each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 176.5x CCBG's $279M. V is the more profitable business, keeping 51.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FISV's 15.2%. On growth, FIS holds the edge at +30.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $279M | $43.0B | $33.9B | $11.7B | $21.1B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $89M | $27.6B | $21.6B | $4.1B | $7.5B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $62M | $22.2B | $15.6B | $2.7B | $3.2B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $98M | $21.2B | $17.7B | $2.8B | $4.0B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +87.1% | +81.3% | +83.0% | +37.6% | +60.8% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +30.0% | +61.1% | +59.4% | +17.9% | +24.4% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +22.0% | +51.7% | +45.9% | +22.9% | +15.2% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +35.1% | +49.2% | +52.2% | +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 | +20.8% | +35.3% | +21.2% | +30.6% | -29.1% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
FISV leads this category, winning 6 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 | $808M | $618.5B | $433.7B | $20.3B | $28.8B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $839M | $623.5B | $442.2B | $23.7B | $57.1B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.09x | 31.61x | 29.66x | 52.27x | 8.48x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.04x | 24.51x | 24.90x | 6.24x | 6.62x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.94x | 2.00x | 1.41x | 2.14x | 0.24x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.39x | 24.73x | 21.52x | 6.50x | 6.44x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.89x | 15.46x | 13.23x | 1.90x | 1.36x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.46x | 16.72x | 56.80x | 1.46x | 1.14x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 10.10x | 28.66x | 25.65x | 7.21x | 6.63x | 67.15x |
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 $12 for CCBG. CCBG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MA's 2.45x. 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 | +11.5% | +58.9% | +2.1% | +18.4% | +12.4% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.4% | +22.7% | +29.5% | +7.5% | +4.0% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.3% | +29.2% | +56.5% | +6.0% | +8.1% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.4% | +36.2% | +64.4% | +6.6% | +10.2% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 6 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.17x | 0.66x | 2.45x | 0.29x | 1.13x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $31M | $5.0B | $8.4B | $3.4B | $28.3B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $62M | $20.2B | $10.6B | $599M | $798M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $93M | $25.2B | $19.0B | $4.0B | $29.1B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.56x | 26.72x | 27.23x | 21.16x | 6.39x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CCBG leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CCBG five years ago would be worth $19,565 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,267 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, CCBG leads with a +27.9% total return vs FISV's -68.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CCBG at 15.9% vs FISV's -23.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +12.6% | -6.6% | -12.7% | -38.9% | -18.0% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +27.9% | -12.5% | -16.3% | -49.4% | -68.0% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +55.7% | +45.6% | +32.8% | -18.9% | -54.3% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +95.7% | +42.0% | +37.1% | -67.3% | -50.7% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +257.8% | +330.2% | +440.0% | -25.6% | +1.8% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +15.9% | +13.3% | +9.9% | -6.8% | -23.0% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 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. KO currently trades 98.3% 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 | 0.56x | 0.54x | 0.49x | 0.61x | 0.87x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $48.78 | $374.17 | $601.77 | $82.74 | $177.36 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $35.94 | $293.89 | $464.52 | $37.91 | $51.78 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.6% | +86.2% | +81.4% | +47.4% | +30.3% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.8 | 46.9 | 45.8 | 30.8 | 40.8 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 77K | 6.4M | 3.1M | 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: CCBG as "Hold", V as "Buy", MA 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 MA's 0.63%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $49.50 | $368.91 | $660.43 | $62.88 | $71.15 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 61 | 64 | 37 | 60 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.1% | +0.7% | +0.6% | +4.2% | — | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 11 | 18 | 14 | 1 | — | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.00 | $2.36 | $3.07 | $1.63 | — | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.2% | +2.7% | +7.0% | +20.5% | +0.2% |
FISV leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). MA leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
CCBG vs V vs MA vs FIS vs FISV vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CCBG or V or MA or FIS or FISV or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is the stronger pick with 16.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). 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 Visa Inc. (V) a "Buy" — based on 61 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 — CCBG or V or MA 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 — CCBG or V or MA or FIS or FISV or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Capital City Bank Group, Inc.
(CCBG) delivered a total return of +95. 7%, compared to -67. 3% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MA returned +440. 0% 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 — CCBG or V or MA 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, Capital City Bank Group, Inc. (CCBG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 2% for Mastercard Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CCBG or V or MA or FIS or FISV or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is pulling ahead at 16.
4% versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% 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 — CCBG or V or MA or FIS or FISV or KO?
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 16. 5% for FIS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CCBG leads at 87. 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 CCBG or V or MA 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 — CCBG or V or MA or FIS or FISV or KO?
In this comparison, FIS (4.
2% yield), KO (2. 5% yield), CCBG (2. 1% 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 CCBG or V or MA 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 CCBG and V and MA and FIS and FISV and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (CCBG (Financial Services) and V (Financial Services) and MA (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: CCBG is a small-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; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. CCBG, V, MA, 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.