Woori Financial Group Inc.
Woori Financial Group Inc. WF Peers
See (WF) 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WF | $46.17 | +0.23% | 11.4B | 5.76 | $8.01 | +4.72% |
| USB-PA | $845.00 | +0.24% | 1.4T | 240.74 | $3.51 | +4.54% |
| HDB | $74.95 | +0.44% | 191.4B | 23.06 | $3.25 | +0.79% |
| PNC | $180.71 | +1.87% | 71.5B | 12.77 | $14.15 | +3.56% |
| USB | $44.07 | +1.80% | 68.7B | 10.85 | $4.06 | +4.54% |
| ITUB | $6.65 | +0.30% | 68.2B | 9.37 | $0.71 | +6.96% |
| MFG | $5.43 | -0.46% | 68.1B | 11.07 | $0.49 | +1.18% |
| USB-PS | $18.54 | +0.38% | 67.9B | N/A | N/A | +4.54% |
| USB-PP | $22.57 | +0.25% | 67.7B | 4.87 | $4.64 | +4.54% |
| USB-PH | $20.26 | -0.10% | 66.6B | 4.37 | $4.64 | +4.54% |
Stock Comparison
WF vs USB-PA Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, USB-PA has a market cap of 1.4T. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while USB-PA trades at $845.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas USB-PA's P/E ratio is 240.74. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USB-PA's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to USB-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs HDB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, HDB has a market cap of 191.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while HDB trades at $74.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas HDB's P/E ratio is 23.06. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HDB's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HDB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs PNC Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, PNC has a market cap of 71.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while PNC trades at $180.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas PNC's P/E ratio is 12.77. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PNC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to PNC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs USB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, USB has a market cap of 68.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while USB trades at $44.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas USB's P/E ratio is 10.85. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USB's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to USB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs ITUB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, ITUB has a market cap of 68.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while ITUB trades at $6.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas ITUB's P/E ratio is 9.37. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ITUB's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to ITUB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs MFG Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, MFG has a market cap of 68.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while MFG trades at $5.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas MFG's P/E ratio is 11.07. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to MFG's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to MFG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs USB-PS Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, USB-PS has a market cap of 67.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while USB-PS trades at $18.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas USB-PS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USB-PS's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to USB-PS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs USB-PP Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, USB-PP has a market cap of 67.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while USB-PP trades at $22.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas USB-PP's P/E ratio is 4.87. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USB-PP's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to USB-PP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs USB-PH Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, USB-PH has a market cap of 66.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while USB-PH trades at $20.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas USB-PH's P/E ratio is 4.37. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USB-PH's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to USB-PH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs LYG Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, LYG has a market cap of 61.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while LYG trades at $4.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas LYG's P/E ratio is 12.47. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to LYG's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to LYG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs IBN Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, IBN has a market cap of 58.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while IBN trades at $32.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas IBN's P/E ratio is 19.59. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to IBN's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to IBN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs DB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, DB has a market cap of 54B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while DB trades at $27.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas DB's P/E ratio is 14.71. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to DB's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to DB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs TFC Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, TFC has a market cap of 53.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while TFC trades at $41.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas TFC's P/E ratio is -216.16. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TFC's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to TFC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BSBR Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BSBR has a market cap of 39.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while BSBR trades at $5.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BSBR's P/E ratio is 17.05. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BSBR's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BSBR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs HBANL Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, HBANL has a market cap of 36.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while HBANL trades at $25.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas HBANL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HBANL's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HBANL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs HBANM Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, HBANM has a market cap of 31.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while HBANM trades at $21.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas HBANM's P/E ratio is 28.15. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HBANM's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HBANM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs MTB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, MTB has a market cap of 30.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while MTB trades at $189.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas MTB's P/E ratio is 12.68. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to MTB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to MTB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BBD Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BBD has a market cap of 29.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while BBD trades at $3.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BBD's P/E ratio is 10.08. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BBD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BBD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BBDO Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BBDO has a market cap of 29.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while BBDO trades at $2.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BBDO's P/E ratio is 8.73. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BBDO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BBDO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs KB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, KB has a market cap of 29.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while KB trades at $78.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas KB's P/E ratio is 7.41. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KB's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to KB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs TFC-PO Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, TFC-PO has a market cap of 27.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while TFC-PO trades at $20.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas TFC-PO's P/E ratio is 4.65. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TFC-PO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to TFC-PO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FITB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FITB has a market cap of 26.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FITB trades at $40.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FITB's P/E ratio is 12.63. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FITB's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to FITB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs TFC-PI Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, TFC-PI has a market cap of 26.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while TFC-PI trades at $20.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas TFC-PI's P/E ratio is 4.56. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TFC-PI's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to TFC-PI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs HBANP Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, HBANP has a market cap of 25.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while HBANP trades at $17.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas HBANP's P/E ratio is 22.30. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HBANP's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HBANP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs USB-PR Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, USB-PR has a market cap of 25.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while USB-PR trades at $16.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas USB-PR's P/E ratio is 3.48. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USB-PR's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to USB-PR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FCNCA Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FCNCA has a market cap of 24.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FCNCA trades at $1,891.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FCNCA's P/E ratio is 10.83. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FCNCA's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to FCNCA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs TFC-PR Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, TFC-PR has a market cap of 24.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while TFC-PR trades at $18.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas TFC-PR's P/E ratio is 4.21. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TFC-PR's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to TFC-PR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FCNCP Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FCNCP has a market cap of 24.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FCNCP trades at $21.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FCNCP's P/E ratio is 0.38. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FCNCP's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FCNCP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FCNCO Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FCNCO has a market cap of 24.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FCNCO trades at $22.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FCNCO's P/E ratio is 0.39. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FCNCO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to FCNCO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs USB-PQ Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, USB-PQ has a market cap of 23.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while USB-PQ trades at $15.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas USB-PQ's P/E ratio is 3.26. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USB-PQ's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to USB-PQ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs HBAN Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, HBAN has a market cap of 23.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while HBAN trades at $16.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas HBAN's P/E ratio is 12.17. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HBAN's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to HBAN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs RF-PF Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, RF-PF has a market cap of 22.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while RF-PF trades at $25.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas RF-PF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RF-PF's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to RF-PF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs SHG Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, SHG has a market cap of 21.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while SHG trades at $43.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas SHG's P/E ratio is 6.69. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SHG's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to SHG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs RF Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, RF has a market cap of 20.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while RF trades at $22.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas RF's P/E ratio is 10.94. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RF's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to RF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs RF-PC Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, RF-PC has a market cap of 20B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while RF-PC trades at $24.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas RF-PC's P/E ratio is 10.08. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RF-PC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to RF-PC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CFG Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CFG has a market cap of 18.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while CFG trades at $42.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CFG's P/E ratio is 13.49. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CFG's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CFG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs KEY Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, KEY has a market cap of 18.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while KEY trades at $16.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas KEY's P/E ratio is -86.76. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KEY's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to KEY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs KEY-PK Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, KEY-PK has a market cap of 17.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while KEY-PK trades at $21.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas KEY-PK's P/E ratio is 15.14. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KEY-PK's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to KEY-PK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs KEY-PJ Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, KEY-PJ has a market cap of 17.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while KEY-PJ trades at $21.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas KEY-PJ's P/E ratio is 8.59. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KEY-PJ's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to KEY-PJ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs KEY-PI Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, KEY-PI has a market cap of 17.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while KEY-PI trades at $24.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas KEY-PI's P/E ratio is 9.89. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KEY-PI's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to KEY-PI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs KEY-PL Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, KEY-PL has a market cap of 17.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while KEY-PL trades at $24.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas KEY-PL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KEY-PL's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to KEY-PL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BAP Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BAP has a market cap of 17.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while BAP trades at $216.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BAP's P/E ratio is 11.04. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BAP's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BAP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FITBI Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FITBI has a market cap of 17.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FITBI trades at $25.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FITBI's P/E ratio is 7.38. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FITBI's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FITBI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FITBP Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FITBP has a market cap of 16.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FITBP trades at $24.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FITBP's P/E ratio is 7.06. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FITBP's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FITBP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs RF-PE Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, RF-PE has a market cap of 15.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while RF-PE trades at $17.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas RF-PE's P/E ratio is 7.19. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RF-PE's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to RF-PE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CFG-PD Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CFG-PD has a market cap of 14.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, 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.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CFG-PD's P/E ratio is 5.29. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CFG-PD's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to CFG-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BCH Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BCH has a market cap of 14.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while BCH trades at $29.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BCH's P/E ratio is 10.75. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BCH's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BCH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs VLYPN Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, VLYPN has a market cap of 14.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while VLYPN trades at $25.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas VLYPN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to VLYPN's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to VLYPN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FITBO Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FITBO has a market cap of 13.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FITBO trades at $19.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FITBO's P/E ratio is 5.71. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FITBO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FITBO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FHN-PB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FHN-PB has a market cap of 13B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FHN-PB trades at $25.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FHN-PB's P/E ratio is 15.26. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN-PB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FHN-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FHN-PC Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FHN-PC has a market cap of 12.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FHN-PC trades at $25.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FHN-PC's P/E ratio is 14.96. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN-PC's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FHN-PC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CFG-PH Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CFG-PH has a market cap of 12B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while CFG-PH trades at $25.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CFG-PH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CFG-PH's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to CFG-PH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FHN-PE Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FHN-PE has a market cap of 12B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FHN-PE trades at $23.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FHN-PE's P/E ratio is 14.04. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN-PE's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FHN-PE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BSAC Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BSAC has a market cap of 11.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while BSAC trades at $23.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BSAC's P/E ratio is 10.42. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BSAC's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BSAC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CIB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CIB has a market cap of 10.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while CIB trades at $42.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CIB's P/E ratio is 6.77. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CIB's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to CIB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FHN Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FHN has a market cap of 10.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FHN trades at $20.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FHN's P/E ratio is 13.77. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to FHN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs SSB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, SSB has a market cap of 9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while SSB trades at $88.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas SSB's P/E ratio is 13.91. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SSB's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to SSB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs WBS Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, WBS has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while WBS trades at $53.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas WBS's P/E ratio is 11.97. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WBS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to WBS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FHN-PD Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FHN-PD has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, 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.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FHN-PD's P/E ratio is 14.88. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN-PD's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FHN-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FHN-PF Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FHN-PF has a market cap of 8.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FHN-PF trades at $17.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FHN-PF's P/E ratio is 10.30. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN-PF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FHN-PF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CUBI-PE Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CUBI-PE has a market cap of 8.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while CUBI-PE trades at $268.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CUBI-PE's P/E ratio is 26.78. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CUBI-PE's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CUBI-PE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs GGAL Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, GGAL has a market cap of 8.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while GGAL trades at $50.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas GGAL's P/E ratio is 6.38. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GGAL's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to GGAL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs PNFP Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, PNFP has a market cap of 8.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while PNFP trades at $107.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas PNFP's P/E ratio is 17.46. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PNFP's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to PNFP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs WAL Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, WAL has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while WAL trades at $74.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas WAL's P/E ratio is 10.26. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WAL's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to WAL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs WTFC Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, WTFC has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while WTFC trades at $122.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas WTFC's P/E ratio is 12.12. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WTFC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to WTFC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CBSH Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CBSH has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while CBSH trades at $61.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CBSH's P/E ratio is 15.23. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CBSH's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to CBSH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CFG-PE Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CFG-PE has a market cap of 8.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while CFG-PE trades at $18.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CFG-PE's P/E ratio is 3.98. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CFG-PE's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to CFG-PE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CFR Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CFR has a market cap of 8.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while CFR trades at $126.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CFR's P/E ratio is 13.88. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CFR's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CFR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs WTFCM Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, WTFCM has a market cap of 8.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while WTFCM trades at $25.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas WTFCM's P/E ratio is 3.56. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WTFCM's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to WTFCM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs ONB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, ONB has a market cap of 7.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while ONB trades at $21.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas ONB's P/E ratio is 12.24. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ONB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to ONB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs UMBF Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, UMBF has a market cap of 7.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while UMBF trades at $101.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas UMBF's P/E ratio is 12.79. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to UMBF's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to UMBF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs ONBPO Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, ONBPO has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while ONBPO trades at $24.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas ONBPO's P/E ratio is 28.00. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ONBPO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to ONBPO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs ONBPP Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, ONBPP has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while ONBPP trades at $25.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas ONBPP's P/E ratio is 28.21. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ONBPP's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to ONBPP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CMA Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CMA has a market cap of 7.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while CMA trades at $57.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CMA's P/E ratio is 10.84. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CMA's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CMA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BSMX Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BSMX has a market cap of 7.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, 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.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BSMX's P/E ratio is 4.88. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BSMX's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BSMX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BPOP Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BPOP has a market cap of 7.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while BPOP trades at $107.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BPOP's P/E ratio is 11.10. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BPOP's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BPOP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs ZION Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, ZION has a market cap of 7.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while ZION trades at $49.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas ZION's P/E ratio is 9.78. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ZION's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to ZION. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs SNV Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, SNV has a market cap of 6.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while SNV trades at $49.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas SNV's P/E ratio is 14.04. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SNV's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to SNV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs SNV-PD Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, SNV-PD has a market cap of 6.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while SNV-PD trades at $24.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas SNV-PD's P/E ratio is 5.18. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SNV-PD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to SNV-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs PB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, PB has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while PB trades at $69.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas PB's P/E ratio is 13.16. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PB's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to PB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BOKF Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BOKF has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while BOKF trades at $94.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BOKF's P/E ratio is 10.89. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BOKF's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BOKF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs CADE Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, CADE has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while CADE trades at $31.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas CADE's P/E ratio is 11.22. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CADE's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CADE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs HOMB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, HOMB has a market cap of 5.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while HOMB trades at $28.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas HOMB's P/E ratio is 13.45. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HOMB's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to HOMB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs OZK Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, OZK has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while OZK trades at $46.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas OZK's P/E ratio is 7.56. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to OZK's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to OZK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BXS Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BXS has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, 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.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BXS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BXS's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BXS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FFIN Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FFIN has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FFIN trades at $35.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FFIN's P/E ratio is 22.02. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FFIN's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to FFIN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs UBSI Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, UBSI has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while UBSI trades at $35.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas UBSI's P/E ratio is 13.30. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to UBSI's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to UBSI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FNB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FNB has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FNB trades at $14.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FNB's P/E ratio is 11.06. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FNB's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to FNB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs VLY Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, VLY has a market cap of 5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while VLY trades at $8.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas VLY's P/E ratio is 12.64. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to VLY's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to VLY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs VLYPP Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, VLYPP has a market cap of 4.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while VLYPP trades at $24.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas VLYPP's P/E ratio is 22.13. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to VLYPP's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to VLYPP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs COLB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, COLB has a market cap of 4.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while COLB trades at $22.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas COLB's P/E ratio is 9.66. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to COLB's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to COLB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs VLYPO Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, VLYPO has a market cap of 4.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while VLYPO trades at $24.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas VLYPO's P/E ratio is 22.32. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to VLYPO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to VLYPO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs HWC Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, HWC has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while HWC trades at $55.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas HWC's P/E ratio is 10.21. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HWC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to HWC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs FLG Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, FLG has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while FLG trades at $11.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas FLG's P/E ratio is -4.56. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FLG's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to FLG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs GBCI Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, GBCI has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while GBCI trades at $41.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas GBCI's P/E ratio is 22.24. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GBCI's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to GBCI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs HWCPZ Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, HWCPZ has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while HWCPZ trades at $23.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas HWCPZ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HWCPZ's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HWCPZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs BMA Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, BMA has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while BMA trades at $68.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas BMA's P/E ratio is -80.20. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BMA's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BMA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs NYCB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, NYCB has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while NYCB trades at $10.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas NYCB's P/E ratio is -0.73. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NYCB's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to NYCB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.
WF vs AUB Comparison
WF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WF stands at 11.4B. In comparison, AUB has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $46.17, while AUB trades at $30.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.76, whereas AUB's P/E ratio is 14.34. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AUB's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to AUB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.