PacWest Bancorp
PacWest Bancorp (PACWP) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (PACWP) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Banks - Regional Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PACWP | $20.94 | +0.00% | 904.5M | 4.33 | $4.84 | N/A |
| HDB | $76.44 | -0.44% | 198.1B | 25.56 | $3.03 | +0.85% |
| IBN | $33.32 | -1.55% | 120.5B | 19.86 | $1.70 | +0.71% |
| PNC | $194.31 | +0.18% | 76.5B | 13.21 | $14.63 | +3.36% |
| MFG | $5.93 | -0.25% | 74.1B | 12.54 | $0.47 | +2.66% |
| USB-PP | $22.99 | +1.28% | 72.1B | 4.94 | $4.64 | +4.33% |
| USB | $46.44 | +0.75% | 71.8B | 11.03 | $4.18 | +4.33% |
| USB-PH | $20.61 | +0.34% | 71.8B | 4.44 | $4.64 | +4.33% |
| USB-PA | $827.00 | +0.00% | 71.8B | 235.61 | $3.51 | +4.33% |
| USB-PS | $18.85 | +0.91% | 71.5B | N/A | N/A | +4.33% |
Stock Comparison
PACWP vs HDB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, HDB has a market cap of 198.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while HDB trades at $76.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas HDB's P/E ratio is 25.56. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to HDB's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to HDB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check HDB's competition here
PACWP vs IBN Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, IBN has a market cap of 120.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while IBN trades at $33.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas IBN's P/E ratio is 19.86. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to IBN's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to IBN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check IBN's competition here
PACWP vs PNC Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, PNC has a market cap of 76.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while PNC trades at $194.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas PNC's P/E ratio is 13.21. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to PNC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to PNC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check PNC's competition here
PACWP vs MFG Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, MFG has a market cap of 74.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while MFG trades at $5.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas MFG's P/E ratio is 12.54. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to MFG's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to MFG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check MFG's competition here
PACWP vs USB-PP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, USB-PP has a market cap of 72.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while USB-PP trades at $22.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas USB-PP's P/E ratio is 4.94. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to USB-PP's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to USB-PP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check USB-PP's competition here
PACWP vs USB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, USB has a market cap of 71.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while USB trades at $46.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas USB's P/E ratio is 11.03. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to USB's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to USB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check USB's competition here
PACWP vs USB-PH Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, USB-PH has a market cap of 71.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while USB-PH trades at $20.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas USB-PH's P/E ratio is 4.44. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to USB-PH's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to USB-PH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check USB-PH's competition here
PACWP vs USB-PA Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, USB-PA has a market cap of 71.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while USB-PA trades at $827.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas USB-PA's P/E ratio is 235.61. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to USB-PA's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to USB-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check USB-PA's competition here
PACWP vs USB-PS Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, USB-PS has a market cap of 71.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while USB-PS trades at $18.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas USB-PS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to USB-PS's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to USB-PS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check USB-PS's competition here
PACWP vs LYG Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, LYG has a market cap of 65.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while LYG trades at $4.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas LYG's P/E ratio is 11.93. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to LYG's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to LYG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check LYG's competition here
PACWP vs DB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, DB has a market cap of 63.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while DB trades at $33.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas DB's P/E ratio is 11.49. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to DB's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to DB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check DB's competition here
PACWP vs ITUB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, ITUB has a market cap of 63.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while ITUB trades at $6.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas ITUB's P/E ratio is 8.81. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ITUB's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to ITUB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check ITUB's competition here
PACWP vs TFC Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, TFC has a market cap of 58.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while TFC trades at $44.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas TFC's P/E ratio is 12.13. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to TFC's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to TFC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check TFC's competition here
PACWP vs HBANL Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, HBANL has a market cap of 37.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while HBANL trades at $25.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas HBANL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to HBANL's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to HBANL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check HBANL's competition here
PACWP vs BSBR Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BSBR has a market cap of 35.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BSBR trades at $4.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BSBR's P/E ratio is 15.42. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BSBR's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to BSBR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BSBR's competition here
PACWP vs HBANM Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, HBANM has a market cap of 32.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while HBANM trades at $22.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas HBANM's P/E ratio is 28.87. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to HBANM's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to HBANM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check HBANM's competition here
PACWP vs MTB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, MTB has a market cap of 31.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while MTB trades at $194.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas MTB's P/E ratio is 12.60. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to MTB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to MTB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check MTB's competition here
PACWP vs KB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, KB has a market cap of 29.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while KB trades at $80.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas KB's P/E ratio is 7.52. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to KB's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to KB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check KB's competition here
PACWP vs FITB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FITB has a market cap of 28.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FITB trades at $42.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FITB's P/E ratio is 13.28. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FITB's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FITB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FITB's competition here
PACWP vs TFC-PO Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, TFC-PO has a market cap of 28B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while TFC-PO trades at $21.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas TFC-PO's P/E ratio is 4.77. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to TFC-PO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to TFC-PO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check TFC-PO's competition here
PACWP vs BBD Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BBD has a market cap of 28B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BBD trades at $2.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BBD's P/E ratio is 9.27. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BBD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to BBD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BBD's competition here
PACWP vs BBDO Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BBDO has a market cap of 27.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BBDO trades at $2.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BBDO's P/E ratio is 8.17. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BBDO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to BBDO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BBDO's competition here
PACWP vs KEY-PL Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, KEY-PL has a market cap of 27.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while KEY-PL trades at $24.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas KEY-PL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to KEY-PL's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to KEY-PL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check KEY-PL's competition here
PACWP vs TFC-PI Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, TFC-PI has a market cap of 27B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while TFC-PI trades at $20.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas TFC-PI's P/E ratio is 4.61. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to TFC-PI's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to TFC-PI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check TFC-PI's competition here
PACWP vs FCNCP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FCNCP has a market cap of 27B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FCNCP trades at $20.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FCNCP's P/E ratio is 0.36. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FCNCP's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FCNCP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FCNCP's competition here
PACWP vs FCNCO Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FCNCO has a market cap of 26.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FCNCO trades at $22.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FCNCO's P/E ratio is 0.39. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FCNCO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FCNCO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FCNCO's competition here
PACWP vs HBANP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, HBANP has a market cap of 25.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while HBANP trades at $17.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas HBANP's P/E ratio is 22.58. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to HBANP's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to HBANP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check HBANP's competition here
PACWP vs USB-PR Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, USB-PR has a market cap of 25.4B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while USB-PR trades at $16.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas USB-PR's P/E ratio is 3.52. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to USB-PR's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to USB-PR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check USB-PR's competition here
PACWP vs TFC-PR Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, TFC-PR has a market cap of 25.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while TFC-PR trades at $19.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas TFC-PR's P/E ratio is 4.28. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to TFC-PR's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to TFC-PR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check TFC-PR's competition here
PACWP vs FCNCA Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FCNCA has a market cap of 25B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FCNCA trades at $2,028.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FCNCA's P/E ratio is 12.00. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FCNCA's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FCNCA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FCNCA's competition here
PACWP vs HBAN Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, HBAN has a market cap of 24.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while HBAN trades at $16.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas HBAN's P/E ratio is 12.50. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to HBAN's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to HBAN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check HBAN's competition here
PACWP vs SHG Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, SHG has a market cap of 24B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while SHG trades at $49.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas SHG's P/E ratio is 7.70. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SHG's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to SHG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check SHG's competition here
PACWP vs USB-PQ Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, USB-PQ has a market cap of 23.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while USB-PQ trades at $15.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas USB-PQ's P/E ratio is 3.31. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to USB-PQ's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to USB-PQ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check USB-PQ's competition here
PACWP vs RF-PC Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, RF-PC has a market cap of 23.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while RF-PC trades at $24.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas RF-PC's P/E ratio is 10.26. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to RF-PC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to RF-PC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check RF-PC's competition here
PACWP vs RF Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, RF has a market cap of 23.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while RF trades at $26.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas RF's P/E ratio is 12.25. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to RF's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to RF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check RF's competition here
PACWP vs RF-PF Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, RF-PF has a market cap of 23.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while RF-PF trades at $25.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas RF-PF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to RF-PF's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to RF-PF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check RF-PF's competition here
PACWP vs CFG Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CFG has a market cap of 21.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CFG trades at $49.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CFG's P/E ratio is 14.97. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CFG's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to CFG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CFG's competition here
PACWP vs KEY-PK Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, KEY-PK has a market cap of 20.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while KEY-PK trades at $21.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas KEY-PK's P/E ratio is 15.04. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to KEY-PK's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to KEY-PK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check KEY-PK's competition here
PACWP vs KEY-PJ Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, KEY-PJ has a market cap of 20.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while KEY-PJ trades at $21.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas KEY-PJ's P/E ratio is 8.83. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to KEY-PJ's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to KEY-PJ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check KEY-PJ's competition here
PACWP vs KEY-PI Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, KEY-PI has a market cap of 20.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while KEY-PI trades at $24.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas KEY-PI's P/E ratio is 10.06. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to KEY-PI's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to KEY-PI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check KEY-PI's competition here
PACWP vs KEY Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, KEY has a market cap of 20.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while KEY trades at $18.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas KEY's P/E ratio is -229.81. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to KEY's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to KEY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check KEY's competition here
PACWP vs BAP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BAP has a market cap of 18.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BAP trades at $233.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BAP's P/E ratio is 11.80. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BAP's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to BAP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BAP's competition here
PACWP vs FITBI Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FITBI has a market cap of 17.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FITBI trades at $25.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FITBI's P/E ratio is 7.35. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FITBI's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FITBI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FITBI's competition here
PACWP vs FITBP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FITBP has a market cap of 16.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FITBP trades at $24.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FITBP's P/E ratio is 6.98. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FITBP's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FITBP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FITBP's competition here
PACWP vs RF-PE Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, RF-PE has a market cap of 16.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while RF-PE trades at $17.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas RF-PE's P/E ratio is 7.42. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to RF-PE's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to RF-PE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check RF-PE's competition here
PACWP vs CFG-PD Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CFG-PD has a market cap of 14.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CFG-PD trades at $24.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CFG-PD's P/E ratio is 5.29. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CFG-PD's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to CFG-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CFG-PD's competition here
PACWP vs VLYPN Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, VLYPN has a market cap of 14.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while VLYPN trades at $25.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas VLYPN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to VLYPN's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to VLYPN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check VLYPN's competition here
PACWP vs BCH Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BCH has a market cap of 14.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BCH trades at $27.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BCH's P/E ratio is 10.57. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BCH's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to BCH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BCH's competition here
PACWP vs FITBO Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FITBO has a market cap of 13.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FITBO trades at $19.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FITBO's P/E ratio is 5.73. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FITBO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FITBO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FITBO's competition here
PACWP vs WF Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, WF has a market cap of 13.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while WF trades at $53.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas WF's P/E ratio is 6.68. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to WF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to WF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check WF's competition here
PACWP vs FHN-PC Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FHN-PC has a market cap of 12.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FHN-PC trades at $25.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FHN-PC's P/E ratio is 14.94. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FHN-PC's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FHN-PC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FHN-PC's competition here
PACWP vs FHN-PB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FHN-PB has a market cap of 12.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FHN-PB trades at $24.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FHN-PB's P/E ratio is 14.87. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FHN-PB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FHN-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FHN-PB's competition here
PACWP vs FHN-PE Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FHN-PE has a market cap of 12.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FHN-PE trades at $24.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FHN-PE's P/E ratio is 14.62. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FHN-PE's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FHN-PE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FHN-PE's competition here
PACWP vs CFG-PH Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CFG-PH has a market cap of 12.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CFG-PH trades at $26.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CFG-PH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CFG-PH's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to CFG-PH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CFG-PH's competition here
PACWP vs CIB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CIB has a market cap of 11.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CIB trades at $43.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CIB's P/E ratio is 6.83. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CIB's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to CIB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CIB's competition here
PACWP vs FHN Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FHN has a market cap of 11.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FHN trades at $22.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FHN's P/E ratio is 15.49. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FHN's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FHN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FHN's competition here
PACWP vs BSAC Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BSAC has a market cap of 11B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BSAC trades at $23.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BSAC's P/E ratio is 9.84. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BSAC's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to BSAC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BSAC's competition here
PACWP vs CUBI-PE Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CUBI-PE has a market cap of 10.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CUBI-PE trades at $335.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CUBI-PE's P/E ratio is 33.45. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CUBI-PE's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to CUBI-PE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CUBI-PE's competition here
PACWP vs WBS Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, WBS has a market cap of 9.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while WBS trades at $59.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas WBS's P/E ratio is 11.97. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to WBS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to WBS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check WBS's competition here
PACWP vs SSB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, SSB has a market cap of 9.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while SSB trades at $97.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas SSB's P/E ratio is 14.43. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SSB's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to SSB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check SSB's competition here
PACWP vs ONBPO Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, ONBPO has a market cap of 9.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while ONBPO trades at $25.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas ONBPO's P/E ratio is 28.36. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ONBPO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to ONBPO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check ONBPO's competition here
PACWP vs ONBPP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, ONBPP has a market cap of 9.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while ONBPP trades at $25.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas ONBPP's P/E ratio is 28.31. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ONBPP's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to ONBPP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check ONBPP's competition here
PACWP vs FHN-PF Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FHN-PF has a market cap of 9.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FHN-PF trades at $18.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FHN-PF's P/E ratio is 10.77. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FHN-PF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FHN-PF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FHN-PF's competition here
PACWP vs CMA Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CMA has a market cap of 9.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CMA trades at $69.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CMA's P/E ratio is 13.32. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CMA's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to CMA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CMA's competition here
PACWP vs FHN-PD Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FHN-PD has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FHN-PD trades at $24.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FHN-PD's P/E ratio is 14.88. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FHN-PD's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FHN-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FHN-PD's competition here
PACWP vs WAL Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, WAL has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while WAL trades at $81.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas WAL's P/E ratio is 10.56. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to WAL's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to WAL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check WAL's competition here
PACWP vs WTFC Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, WTFC has a market cap of 8.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while WTFC trades at $132.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas WTFC's P/E ratio is 12.45. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to WTFC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to WTFC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check WTFC's competition here
PACWP vs CFR Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CFR has a market cap of 8.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CFR trades at $135.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CFR's P/E ratio is 14.80. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CFR's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to CFR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CFR's competition here
PACWP vs GGAL Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, GGAL has a market cap of 8.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while GGAL trades at $52.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas GGAL's P/E ratio is 7.19. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to GGAL's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to GGAL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check GGAL's competition here
PACWP vs CFG-PE Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CFG-PE has a market cap of 8.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CFG-PE trades at $19.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CFG-PE's P/E ratio is 4.20. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CFG-PE's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to CFG-PE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CFG-PE's competition here
PACWP vs UMBF Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, UMBF has a market cap of 8.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while UMBF trades at $112.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas UMBF's P/E ratio is 13.74. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to UMBF's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to UMBF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check UMBF's competition here
PACWP vs CBSH Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CBSH has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CBSH trades at $62.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CBSH's P/E ratio is 14.80. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CBSH's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to CBSH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CBSH's competition here
PACWP vs ZION Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, ZION has a market cap of 8.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while ZION trades at $55.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas ZION's P/E ratio is 9.99. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ZION's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to ZION. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check ZION's competition here
PACWP vs ONB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, ONB has a market cap of 7.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while ONB trades at $21.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas ONB's P/E ratio is 12.76. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ONB's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to ONB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check ONB's competition here
PACWP vs BPOP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BPOP has a market cap of 7.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BPOP trades at $114.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BPOP's P/E ratio is 11.15. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BPOP's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to BPOP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BPOP's competition here
PACWP vs BSMX Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BSMX has a market cap of 7.4B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BSMX trades at $5.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BSMX's P/E ratio is 4.88. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BSMX's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to BSMX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BSMX's competition here
PACWP vs PNFP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, PNFP has a market cap of 7.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while PNFP trades at $91.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas PNFP's P/E ratio is 12.27. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to PNFP's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to PNFP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check PNFP's competition here
PACWP vs SNV Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, SNV has a market cap of 6.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while SNV trades at $49.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas SNV's P/E ratio is 9.48. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SNV's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to SNV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check SNV's competition here
PACWP vs SNV-PD Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, SNV-PD has a market cap of 6.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while SNV-PD trades at $25.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas SNV-PD's P/E ratio is 5.28. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SNV-PD's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to SNV-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check SNV-PD's competition here
PACWP vs BOKF Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BOKF has a market cap of 6.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BOKF trades at $104.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BOKF's P/E ratio is 12.48. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BOKF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to BOKF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BOKF's competition here
PACWP vs CADE Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, CADE has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while CADE trades at $35.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas CADE's P/E ratio is 12.90. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CADE's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to CADE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check CADE's competition here
PACWP vs PB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, PB has a market cap of 6.4B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while PB trades at $67.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas PB's P/E ratio is 12.25. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to PB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check PB's competition here
PACWP vs OZK Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, OZK has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while OZK trades at $50.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas OZK's P/E ratio is 8.24. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to OZK's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to OZK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check OZK's competition here
PACWP vs HOMB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, HOMB has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while HOMB trades at $28.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas HOMB's P/E ratio is 13.12. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to HOMB's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to HOMB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check HOMB's competition here
PACWP vs FNB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FNB has a market cap of 5.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FNB trades at $15.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FNB's P/E ratio is 12.07. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FNB's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FNB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FNB's competition here
PACWP vs VLY Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, VLY has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while VLY trades at $9.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas VLY's P/E ratio is 12.15. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to VLY's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to VLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check VLY's competition here
PACWP vs VLYPP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, VLYPP has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while VLYPP trades at $25.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas VLYPP's P/E ratio is 22.70. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to VLYPP's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to VLYPP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check VLYPP's competition here
PACWP vs VLYPO Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, VLYPO has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while VLYPO trades at $25.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas VLYPO's P/E ratio is 22.60. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to VLYPO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to VLYPO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check VLYPO's competition here
PACWP vs BXS Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, BXS has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while BXS trades at $28.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas BXS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BXS's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to BXS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check BXS's competition here
PACWP vs GBCI Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, GBCI has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while GBCI trades at $45.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas GBCI's P/E ratio is 23.76. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to GBCI's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to GBCI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check GBCI's competition here
PACWP vs HWCPZ Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, HWCPZ has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while HWCPZ trades at $23.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas HWCPZ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to HWCPZ's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to HWCPZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check HWCPZ's competition here
PACWP vs HWC Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, HWC has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while HWC trades at $60.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas HWC's P/E ratio is 11.16. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to HWC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to HWC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check HWC's competition here
PACWP vs UBSI Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, UBSI has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while UBSI trades at $36.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas UBSI's P/E ratio is 12.74. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to UBSI's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to UBSI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check UBSI's competition here
PACWP vs FFIN Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FFIN has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FFIN trades at $35.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FFIN's P/E ratio is 20.99. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FFIN's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to FFIN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FFIN's competition here
PACWP vs COLB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, COLB has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while COLB trades at $24.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas COLB's P/E ratio is 9.66. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to COLB's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to COLB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check COLB's competition here
PACWP vs FLG Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, FLG has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while FLG trades at $11.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas FLG's P/E ratio is -8.08. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FLG's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to FLG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check FLG's competition here
PACWP vs AX Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, AX has a market cap of 4.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while AX trades at $86.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas AX's P/E ratio is 11.69. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to AX's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to AX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check AX's competition here
PACWP vs ABCB Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, ABCB has a market cap of 4.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while ABCB trades at $69.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas ABCB's P/E ratio is 13.01. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ABCB's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is less volatile compared to ABCB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check ABCB's competition here
PACWP vs AUBAP Comparison July 2025
PACWP plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PACWP stands at 904.5M. In comparison, AUBAP has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PACWP is priced at $20.94, while AUBAP trades at $25.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PACWP currently has a P/E ratio of 4.33, whereas AUBAP's P/E ratio is 8.08. In terms of profitability, PACWP's ROE is +0.11%, compared to AUBAP's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PACWP is more volatile compared to AUBAP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PACWP.Check AUBAP's competition here