Woori Financial Group Inc. (WF) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (WF) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Banks 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 | $56.40 | -1.67% | 13.7B | 6.47 | $8.72 | +5.05% |
| BBDO | $2.98 | +0.68% | 31.6B | 7.12 | $0.42 | +6.64% |
| BAP | $384.10 | +0.97% | 30.6B | 14.83 | $25.94 | +3.83% |
| BPOPM | $25.17 | -0.12% | 10.7B | N/A | N/A | +1.81% |
| ZIONL | $25.00 | -0.06% | 8.4B | N/A | N/A | +2.62% |
| AVAL | $5.08 | -0.39% | 6B | 12.39 | $0.41 | +2.86% |
| PFH | $16.26 | -0.18% | 5.6B | 1.54 | $10.57 | +5.08% |
| DAVEW | $1.95 | +18.90% | 5.4B | 0.13 | $15.55 | N/A |
| BANFP | $26.85 | +0.00% | 3.8B | 7.34 | $3.66 | +1.70% |
| LMHB | $25.80 | +0.19% | 2.4B | 8.57 | $3.01 | +5.29% |
Stock Comparison
WF vs BBDO Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, BBDO has a market cap of 31.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while BBDO trades at $2.98.
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 6.47, whereas BBDO's P/E ratio is 7.12. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BBDO's ROE of +0.18%. 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.Check BBDO's competition here
WF vs BAP Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, BAP has a market cap of 30.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while BAP trades at $384.10.
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 6.47, whereas BAP's P/E ratio is 14.83. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BAP's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BAP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BAP's competition here
WF vs BPOPM Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, BPOPM has a market cap of 10.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while BPOPM trades at $25.17.
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 6.47, whereas BPOPM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BPOPM's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BPOPM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BPOPM's competition here
WF vs ZIONL Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, ZIONL has a market cap of 8.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while ZIONL trades at $25.00.
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 6.47, whereas ZIONL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ZIONL's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to ZIONL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check ZIONL's competition here
WF vs AVAL Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, AVAL has a market cap of 6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while AVAL trades at $5.08.
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 6.47, whereas AVAL's P/E ratio is 12.39. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AVAL's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to AVAL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check AVAL's competition here
WF vs PFH Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, PFH has a market cap of 5.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while PFH trades at $16.26.
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 6.47, whereas PFH's P/E ratio is 1.54. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PFH's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to PFH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check PFH's competition here
WF vs DAVEW Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, DAVEW has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while DAVEW trades at $1.95.
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 6.47, whereas DAVEW's P/E ratio is 0.13. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to DAVEW's ROE of +0.85%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to DAVEW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check DAVEW's competition here
WF vs BANFP Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, BANFP has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while BANFP trades at $26.85.
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 6.47, whereas BANFP's P/E ratio is 7.34. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BANFP's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BANFP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BANFP's competition here
WF vs LMHB Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, LMHB has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while LMHB trades at $25.80.
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 6.47, whereas LMHB's P/E ratio is 8.57. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to LMHB's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to LMHB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check LMHB's competition here
WF vs CBK Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, CBK has a market cap of 450.5M. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while CBK trades at $32.88.
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 6.47, whereas CBK's P/E ratio is 11.47. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CBK's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CBK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check CBK's competition here
WF vs HVMC Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, HVMC has a market cap of 299.7M. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while HVMC trades at $10.19.
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 6.47, whereas HVMC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HVMC's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HVMC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check HVMC's competition here
WF vs BLNE Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, BLNE has a market cap of 12.5M. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while BLNE trades at $1.38.
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 6.47, whereas BLNE's P/E ratio is -1.28. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BLNE's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BLNE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BLNE's competition here
WF vs GLDX Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, GLDX has a market cap of 3.1M. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while GLDX trades at $25.51.
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 6.47, whereas GLDX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GLDX's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to GLDX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check GLDX's competition here
WF vs PCBK Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, PCBK has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while PCBK trades at $2.02.
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 6.47, whereas PCBK's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PCBK's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to PCBK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check PCBK's competition here
WF vs SNBC Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, SNBC has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while SNBC trades at $24.50.
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 6.47, whereas SNBC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SNBC's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to SNBC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check SNBC's competition here
WF vs CACB Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, CACB has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while CACB trades at $6.99.
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 6.47, whereas CACB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CACB's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CACB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check CACB's competition here
WF vs CBCO Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, CBCO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while CBCO trades at $21.44.
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 6.47, whereas CBCO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CBCO's ROE of +2.72%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to CBCO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check CBCO's competition here
WF vs LSBG Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, LSBG has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while LSBG trades at $21.94.
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 6.47, whereas LSBG's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to LSBG's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to LSBG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check LSBG's competition here
WF vs GTWN Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, GTWN has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while GTWN trades at $26.00.
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 6.47, whereas GTWN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GTWN's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to GTWN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check GTWN's competition here
WF vs RIVR Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, RIVR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while RIVR trades at $34.32.
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 6.47, whereas RIVR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RIVR's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to RIVR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check RIVR's competition here
WF vs BPOPN Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, BPOPN has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while BPOPN trades at $25.23.
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 6.47, whereas BPOPN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BPOPN's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BPOPN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BPOPN's competition here
WF vs COB Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, COB has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while COB trades at $14.10.
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 6.47, whereas COB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to COB's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to COB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check COB's competition here
WF vs ASBB Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, ASBB has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while ASBB trades at $45.10.
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 6.47, whereas ASBB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ASBB's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to ASBB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check ASBB's competition here
WF vs ABCW Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, ABCW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while ABCW trades at $47.86.
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 6.47, whereas ABCW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ABCW's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to ABCW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check ABCW's competition here
WF vs HFFC Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, HFFC has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while HFFC trades at $19.64.
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 6.47, whereas HFFC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HFFC's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HFFC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check HFFC's competition here
WF vs MBVT Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, MBVT has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while MBVT trades at $49.80.
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 6.47, whereas MBVT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to MBVT's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to MBVT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check MBVT's competition here
WF vs CFNL Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, CFNL has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while CFNL trades at $29.04.
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 6.47, whereas CFNL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CFNL's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CFNL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check CFNL's competition here
WF vs UBRT Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, UBRT has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while UBRT trades at $246.59.
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 6.47, whereas UBRT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to UBRT's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to UBRT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check UBRT's competition here
WF vs BNCN Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, BNCN has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while BNCN trades at $35.15.
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 6.47, whereas BNCN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BNCN's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BNCN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BNCN's competition here
WF vs IBCPO Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, IBCPO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while IBCPO 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 6.47, whereas IBCPO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to IBCPO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to IBCPO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check IBCPO's competition here
WF vs FSBK Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, FSBK has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while FSBK trades at $18.65.
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 6.47, whereas FSBK's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FSBK's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to FSBK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check FSBK's competition here
WF vs PVTBP Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, PVTBP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while PVTBP trades at $25.22.
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 6.47, whereas PVTBP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PVTBP's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to PVTBP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check PVTBP's competition here
WF vs MBRG Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, MBRG has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while MBRG trades at $40.04.
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 6.47, whereas MBRG's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to MBRG's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to MBRG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check MBRG's competition here
WF vs RBPAA Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, RBPAA has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while RBPAA trades at $4.52.
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 6.47, whereas RBPAA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RBPAA's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to RBPAA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check RBPAA's competition here
WF vs ANCX Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, ANCX has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while ANCX trades at $23.61.
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 6.47, whereas ANCX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ANCX's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to ANCX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check ANCX's competition here
WF vs GBNK Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, GBNK has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while GBNK trades at $20.75.
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 6.47, whereas GBNK's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GBNK's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to GBNK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check GBNK's competition here
WF vs COBZ Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, COBZ has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while COBZ trades at $22.14.
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 6.47, whereas COBZ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to COBZ's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to COBZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check COBZ's competition here
WF vs BKMU Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, BKMU has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while BKMU trades at $10.40.
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 6.47, whereas BKMU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BKMU's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BKMU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BKMU's competition here
WF vs DBRT Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, DBRT has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while DBRT trades at $26.36.
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 6.47, whereas DBRT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to DBRT's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to DBRT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check DBRT's competition here
WF vs SIVBO Comparison June 2026
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 13.7B. In comparison, SIVBO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $56.40, while SIVBO trades at $25.30.
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 6.47, whereas SIVBO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SIVBO's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to SIVBO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check SIVBO's competition here