Banks - Regional
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
SBFG vs ICE vs CME vs CZWI vs FIS vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Banks - Regional
Information Technology Services
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
SBFG vs ICE vs CME vs CZWI vs FIS vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Banks - Regional | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Banks - Regional | Information Technology Services | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $147M | $79.60B | $97.79B | $207M | $20.26B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $91M | $12.64B | $6.76B | $90M | $11.66B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $14M | $3.30B | $4.24B | $14M | $2.67B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 70.6% | 61.9% | 86.3% | 54.7% | 37.6% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 19.0% | 38.7% | 65.6% | 7.0% | 17.9% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 9.4x | 17.3x | 22.0x | 11.8x | 6.2x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $74M | $20.28B | $3.76B | $52M | $4.01B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $72M | $837M | $4.42B | $119M | $599M | $10.27B |
SBFG vs ICE vs CME vs CZWI vs FIS vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| SB Financial Group,… (SBFG) | 100 | 147.3 | +47.3% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 153.4 | +53.4% |
| CME Group Inc. (CME) | 100 | 165.8 | +65.8% |
| Citizens Community … (CZWI) | 100 | 312.8 | +212.8% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 29.2 | -70.8% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SBFG vs ICE vs CME vs CZWI vs FIS vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SBFG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and bank quality is your priority.
- Rev growth 11.9%, EPS growth 27.3%
- NIM 3.1% vs CZWI's 2.9%
- 11.9% NII/revenue growth vs CZWI's -9.4%
ICE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for stability.
- Beta 0.35 vs SBFG's 0.64
CME is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 262.4% 10Y total return vs CZWI's 149.0%
- 62.8% margin vs SBFG's 15.4%
CZWI is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.50, Low D/E 27.6%, current ratio 3015.31x
- Beta 0.50, yield 1.7%, current ratio 3015.31x
- +52.1% vs FIS's -49.4%
FIS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.61, yield 4.2%
- PEG 0.26 vs SBFG's 2.94
- Lower P/E (6.2x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.26 vs 2.26
- 4.2% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- 13.1% ROA vs CZWI's 0.8%, ROIC 15.8% vs 2.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.9% NII/revenue growth vs CZWI's -9.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.2x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.26 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 62.8% margin vs SBFG's 15.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs SBFG's 0.64 | |
| Dividends | 4.2% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +52.1% vs FIS's -49.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs CZWI's 0.8%, ROIC 15.8% vs 2.0% |
SBFG vs ICE vs CME vs CZWI vs FIS vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
SBFG vs ICE vs CME vs CZWI vs FIS vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CME leads in 1 of 6 categories
SBFG leads 1 • KO leads 1 • CZWI leads 1 • ICE leads 0 • FIS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CME leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 547.2x CZWI's $90M. CME is the more profitable business, keeping 62.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SBFG's 15.4%. On growth, FIS holds the edge at +30.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $91M | $12.6B | $6.8B | $90M | $11.7B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $19M | $6.5B | $4.7B | $9M | $4.1B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $14M | $3.3B | $4.2B | $14M | $2.7B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $20M | $4.3B | $4.4B | $11M | $2.8B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.6% | +61.9% | +86.3% | +54.7% | +37.6% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +19.0% | +38.7% | +65.6% | +7.0% | +17.9% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.4% | +26.1% | +62.8% | +16.0% | +22.9% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +21.7% | +33.9% | +64.4% | +12.4% | +23.9% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | +30.1% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.5% | +23.1% | +21.4% | +63.0% | +30.6% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
SBFG leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.6x trailing earnings, SBFG trades at a 80% valuation discount to FIS's 52.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CME offers better value at 1.76x vs SBFG's 3.32x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $147M | $79.6B | $97.8B | $207M | $20.3B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $150M | $99.0B | $97.1B | $140M | $23.7B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 10.64x | 24.36x | 24.15x | 14.70x | 52.27x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.44x | 17.34x | 21.98x | 11.79x | 6.24x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.32x | 2.74x | 1.76x | 2.90x | 2.14x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.69x | 15.34x | 21.56x | 15.69x | 6.50x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.61x | 6.30x | 15.00x | 2.29x | 1.90x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.05x | 2.77x | 3.38x | 1.11x | 1.46x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.85x | 18.56x | 23.32x | 19.90x | 7.21x | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 4 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 $8 for CZWI. CME carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x 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 CME's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.3% | +11.6% | +15.3% | +7.8% | +18.4% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.9% | +2.3% | +2.2% | +0.8% | +7.5% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.3% | +7.5% | +10.2% | +2.0% | +6.0% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.0% | +9.5% | +3.6% | +0.6% | +6.6% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 9 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.53x | 0.70x | 0.13x | 0.28x | 0.29x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3M | $19.4B | -$666M | -$67M | $3.4B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $72M | $837M | $4.4B | $119M | $599M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $74M | $20.3B | $3.8B | $52M | $4.0B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.68x | 6.53x | 41.55x | 0.16x | 21.16x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CZWI leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CZWI five years ago would be worth $16,900 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,267 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, CZWI leads with a +52.1% total return vs FIS's -49.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CZWI at 36.4% vs FIS's -6.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +10.6% | -11.8% | +3.2% | +24.3% | -38.9% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +30.3% | -20.4% | +3.6% | +52.1% | -49.4% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +98.0% | +34.6% | +67.9% | +153.7% | -18.9% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +44.8% | +30.9% | +46.2% | +69.0% | -67.3% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +167.5% | +195.3% | +262.4% | +149.0% | -25.6% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +25.6% | +10.4% | +18.9% | +36.4% | -6.8% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CME and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CME is the less volatile stock with a -0.28 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SBFG's 0.64 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 FIS's 47.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.64x | 0.35x | -0.28x | 0.50x | 0.61x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $23.93 | $189.35 | $329.16 | $22.62 | $82.74 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.10 | $136.67 | $244.56 | $12.83 | $37.91 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.4% | +74.2% | +81.9% | +94.9% | +47.4% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.2 | 31.9 | 40.1 | 51.2 | 30.8 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 10K | 3.2M | 2.6M | 41K | 5.6M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FIS and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ICE as "Buy", CME as "Hold", CZWI as "Buy", FIS 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 ICE's 1.38%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $194.00 | $320.80 | — | $62.88 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 36 | 36 | 2 | 37 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +1.4% | +4.1% | +1.7% | +4.2% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 12 | 13 | 15 | 6 | 1 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.60 | $1.93 | $10.92 | $0.37 | $1.63 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.9% | +1.7% | +0.3% | +3.0% | +7.0% | +0.2% |
CME leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). SBFG leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
SBFG vs ICE vs CME vs CZWI vs FIS vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SBFG or ICE or CME or CZWI or FIS or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, SB Financial Group, Inc.
(SBFG) is the stronger pick with 11. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 4% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI). SB Financial Group, Inc. (SBFG) offers the better valuation at 10. 6x trailing P/E (9. 4x forward), 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 — SBFG or ICE or CME or CZWI or FIS or KO?
On trailing P/E, SB Financial Group, Inc.
(SBFG) is the cheapest at 10. 6x 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: Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. wins at 0. 26x versus SB Financial Group, Inc. 's 2. 94x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SBFG or ICE or CME or CZWI or FIS or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc.
(CZWI) delivered a total return of +69. 0%, compared to -67. 3% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CME returned +262. 4% 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 — SBFG or ICE or CME or CZWI or FIS or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 28β versus SB Financial Group, Inc. 's 0. 64β — meaning SBFG is approximately -329% more volatile than CME relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CME Group Inc. (CME) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SBFG or ICE or CME or CZWI or FIS or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), SB Financial Group, Inc.
(SBFG) is pulling ahead at 11. 9% versus -9. 4% for Citizens Community Bancorp, Inc. (CZWI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: SB Financial Group, Inc. grew EPS 27. 3% year-over-year, compared to -47. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, KO leads at 3. 7% 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 — SBFG or ICE or CME or CZWI or FIS or KO?
CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the more profitable company, earning 62. 0% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 62. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CME leads at 64. 9% versus 7. 0% for CZWI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CME leads at 86. 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 SBFG or ICE or CME or CZWI or FIS 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, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 26x versus SB Financial Group, Inc. 's 2. 94x. 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 — SBFG or ICE or CME or CZWI or FIS or KO?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) offers the highest yield at 4. 2%, versus 1. 4% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE).
09Is SBFG or ICE or CME or CZWI or FIS or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CME Group Inc.
(CME) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 28), 4. 1% yield, +262. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CME: +262. 4%, FIS: -25. 6%), 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 SBFG and ICE and CME and CZWI and FIS and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (SBFG (Financial Services) and ICE (Financial Services) and CME (Financial Services) and CZWI (Financial Services) and FIS (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: SBFG is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CME is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; CZWI is a small-cap deep-value stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented 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.