Woori Financial Group Inc. (WF) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
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 | $59.34 | +1.80% | 14.5B | 7.48 | $7.93 | +4.74% |
| HDB | $23.29 | +1.22% | 119.4B | 16.40 | $1.42 | +4.81% |
| MFG | $9.57 | -0.21% | 116.6B | 15.18 | $0.63 | +1.81% |
| IBN | $26.29 | +2.30% | 94.3B | 16.64 | $1.58 | +0.95% |
| PNC | $232.18 | +2.22% | 93.3B | 13.49 | $17.22 | +2.94% |
| USB-PA | $767.46 | +0.00% | 85.9B | 218.65 | $3.51 | +3.68% |
| ITUB | $7.53 | +1.35% | 82.9B | 9.29 | $0.81 | +8.33% |
| LYG | $5.34 | +0.75% | 78.5B | 13.02 | $0.41 | +3.68% |
| USB-PS | $17.28 | -0.46% | 65.6B | N/A | N/A | +3.68% |
| TFC | $49.43 | +1.23% | 61.6B | 12.23 | $4.04 | +4.21% |
Stock Comparison
WF vs HDB 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 14.5B. In comparison, HDB has a market cap of 119.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while HDB trades at $23.29.
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 7.48, whereas HDB's P/E ratio is 16.40. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HDB's ROE of +0.18%. 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.Check HDB's competition here
WF vs MFG 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 14.5B. In comparison, MFG has a market cap of 116.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while MFG trades at $9.57.
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 7.48, whereas MFG's P/E ratio is 15.18. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to MFG's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to MFG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check MFG's competition here
WF vs IBN 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 14.5B. In comparison, IBN has a market cap of 94.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while IBN trades at $26.29.
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 7.48, whereas IBN's P/E ratio is 16.64. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to IBN's ROE of +0.16%. 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.Check IBN's competition here
WF vs PNC 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 14.5B. In comparison, PNC has a market cap of 93.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while PNC trades at $232.18.
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 7.48, whereas PNC's P/E ratio is 13.49. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PNC's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to PNC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check PNC's competition here
WF vs USB-PA 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 14.5B. In comparison, USB-PA has a market cap of 85.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while USB-PA trades at $767.46.
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 7.48, whereas USB-PA's P/E ratio is 218.65. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USB-PA's ROE of +0.12%. 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.Check USB-PA's competition here
WF vs ITUB 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 14.5B. In comparison, ITUB has a market cap of 82.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while ITUB trades at $7.53.
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 7.48, whereas ITUB's P/E ratio is 9.29. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ITUB's ROE of +0.22%. 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.Check ITUB's competition here
WF vs LYG 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 14.5B. In comparison, LYG has a market cap of 78.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while LYG trades at $5.34.
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 7.48, whereas LYG's P/E ratio is 13.02. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to LYG's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to LYG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check LYG's competition here
WF vs USB-PS 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 14.5B. In comparison, USB-PS has a market cap of 65.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while USB-PS trades at $17.28.
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 7.48, 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 +0.12%. 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.Check USB-PS's competition here
WF vs TFC 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 14.5B. In comparison, TFC has a market cap of 61.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while TFC trades at $49.43.
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 7.48, whereas TFC's P/E ratio is 12.23. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TFC's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to TFC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check TFC's competition here
WF vs TFC-PR 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 14.5B. In comparison, TFC-PR has a market cap of 61.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while TFC-PR trades at $18.15.
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 7.48, whereas TFC-PR's P/E ratio is 4.05. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TFC-PR's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check TFC-PR's competition here
WF vs DB 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 14.5B. In comparison, DB has a market cap of 61B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while DB trades at $31.90.
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 7.48, whereas DB's P/E ratio is 8.74. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to DB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to DB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check DB's competition here
WF vs FITB 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 14.5B. In comparison, FITB has a market cap of 47.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FITB trades at $52.71.
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 7.48, whereas FITB's P/E ratio is 17.75. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FITB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FITB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check FITB's competition here
WF vs FITBM 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 14.5B. In comparison, FITBM has a market cap of 47.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FITBM trades at $26.11.
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 7.48, whereas FITBM's P/E ratio is 8.77. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FITBM's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FITBM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check FITBM's competition here
WF vs HBANZ 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 14.5B. In comparison, HBANZ has a market cap of 40.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while HBANZ trades at $20.02.
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 7.48, whereas HBANZ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HBANZ's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HBANZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check HBANZ's competition here
WF vs HBANL 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 14.5B. In comparison, HBANL has a market cap of 39.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while HBANL trades at $25.20.
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 7.48, 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 +0.09%. 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.Check HBANL's competition here
WF vs BSBR 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 14.5B. In comparison, BSBR has a market cap of 39.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while BSBR trades at $5.28.
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 7.48, whereas BSBR's P/E ratio is 16.52. 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.Check BSBR's competition here
WF vs KB 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 14.5B. In comparison, KB has a market cap of 36.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while KB trades at $102.25.
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 7.48, whereas KB's P/E ratio is 9.77. 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.Check KB's competition here
WF vs BBD 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 14.5B. In comparison, BBD has a market cap of 35.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while BBD trades at $3.33.
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 7.48, whereas BBD's P/E ratio is 8.13. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BBD's ROE of +0.16%. 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.Check BBD's competition here
WF vs HBAN 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 14.5B. In comparison, HBAN has a market cap of 34.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while HBAN trades at $16.82.
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 7.48, whereas HBAN's P/E ratio is 12.94. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HBAN's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HBAN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check HBAN's competition here
WF vs MTB 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 14.5B. In comparison, MTB has a market cap of 33B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while MTB trades at $225.43.
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 7.48, whereas MTB's P/E ratio is 12.65. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to MTB's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to MTB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check MTB's competition here
WF vs HBANM 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 14.5B. In comparison, HBANM has a market cap of 32.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while HBANM trades at $20.68.
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 7.48, whereas HBANM's P/E ratio is 26.54. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HBANM's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check HBANM's competition here
WF vs SHG 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 14.5B. In comparison, SHG has a market cap of 31.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while SHG trades at $65.99.
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 7.48, whereas SHG's P/E ratio is 9.87. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SHG's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to SHG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check SHG's competition here
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 14.5B. In comparison, BBDO has a market cap of 30.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while BBDO trades at $2.91.
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 7.48, whereas BBDO's P/E ratio is 7.11. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BBDO's ROE of +0.22%. 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 CFG 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 14.5B. In comparison, CFG has a market cap of 27.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CFG trades at $65.67.
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 7.48, whereas CFG's P/E ratio is 15.56. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CFG's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to CFG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check CFG's competition here
WF vs KEY-PL 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 14.5B. In comparison, KEY-PL has a market cap of 27.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while KEY-PL trades at $24.92.
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 7.48, 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 +0.10%. 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.Check KEY-PL's competition here
WF vs CFG-PH 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 14.5B. In comparison, CFG-PH has a market cap of 27.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CFG-PH trades at $25.71.
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 7.48, 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 +0.08%. 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.Check CFG-PH's competition here
WF vs CFG-PE 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 14.5B. In comparison, CFG-PE has a market cap of 27.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CFG-PE trades at $18.03.
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 7.48, whereas CFG-PE's P/E ratio is 3.82. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CFG-PE's ROE of +0.08%. 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.Check CFG-PE's competition here
WF vs TFC-PO 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 14.5B. In comparison, TFC-PO has a market cap of 26.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while TFC-PO trades at $20.81.
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 7.48, whereas TFC-PO's P/E ratio is 4.63. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TFC-PO's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check TFC-PO's competition here
WF vs HBANP 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 14.5B. In comparison, HBANP has a market cap of 25.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while HBANP trades at $16.11.
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 7.48, whereas HBANP's P/E ratio is 20.71. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HBANP's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check HBANP's competition here
WF vs RF-PE 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 14.5B. In comparison, RF-PE has a market cap of 24.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while RF-PE trades at $15.91.
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 7.48, whereas RF-PE's P/E ratio is 6.60. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RF-PE's ROE of +0.12%. 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.Check RF-PE's competition here
WF vs RF-PC 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 14.5B. In comparison, RF-PC has a market cap of 24.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while RF-PC trades at $24.17.
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 7.48, whereas RF-PC's P/E ratio is 10.05. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RF-PC's ROE of +0.12%. 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.Check RF-PC's competition here
WF vs RF 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 14.5B. In comparison, RF has a market cap of 24.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while RF trades at $28.60.
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 7.48, whereas RF's P/E ratio is 11.86. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RF's ROE of +0.12%. 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.Check RF's competition here
WF vs FCNCA 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 14.5B. In comparison, FCNCA has a market cap of 24.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FCNCA trades at $2,100.68.
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 7.48, whereas FCNCA's P/E ratio is 12.11. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FCNCA's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FCNCA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check FCNCA's competition here
WF vs TFC-PI 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 14.5B. In comparison, TFC-PI has a market cap of 24.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while TFC-PI trades at $19.00.
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 7.48, whereas TFC-PI's P/E ratio is 4.24. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TFC-PI's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check TFC-PI's competition here
WF vs KEY 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 14.5B. In comparison, KEY has a market cap of 24B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while KEY trades at $22.10.
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 7.48, whereas KEY's P/E ratio is 13.56. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KEY's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to KEY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check KEY's competition here
WF vs KEY-PJ 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 14.5B. In comparison, KEY-PJ has a market cap of 23.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while KEY-PJ trades at $20.25.
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 7.48, whereas KEY-PJ's P/E ratio is 8.18. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KEY-PJ's ROE of +0.10%. 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.Check KEY-PJ's competition here
WF vs KEY-PK 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 14.5B. In comparison, KEY-PK has a market cap of 23.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while KEY-PK trades at $20.14.
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 7.48, whereas KEY-PK's P/E ratio is 15.06. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KEY-PK's ROE of +0.10%. 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.Check KEY-PK's competition here
WF vs FCNCN 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 14.5B. In comparison, FCNCN has a market cap of 22.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FCNCN 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 7.48, whereas FCNCN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FCNCN's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FCNCN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check FCNCN's competition here
WF vs RF-PF 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 14.5B. In comparison, RF-PF has a market cap of 22.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while RF-PF trades at $25.31.
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 7.48, 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 +0.12%. 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.Check RF-PF's competition here
WF vs KEY-PI 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 14.5B. In comparison, KEY-PI has a market cap of 20.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while KEY-PI trades at $25.03.
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 7.48, whereas KEY-PI's P/E ratio is 10.13. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KEY-PI's ROE of +0.10%. 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.Check KEY-PI's competition here
WF vs BCH 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 14.5B. In comparison, BCH has a market cap of 19.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while BCH trades at $38.54.
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 7.48, whereas BCH's P/E ratio is 15.43. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BCH's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to BCH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BCH's competition here
WF vs CIB 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 14.5B. In comparison, CIB has a market cap of 17.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CIB trades at $74.90.
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 7.48, whereas CIB's P/E ratio is 9.77. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CIB's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CIB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check CIB's competition here
WF vs FITBI 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 14.5B. In comparison, FITBI has a market cap of 16.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FITBI trades at $25.64.
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 7.48, whereas FITBI's P/E ratio is 7.36. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FITBI's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check FITBI's competition here
WF vs FITBP 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 14.5B. In comparison, FITBP has a market cap of 16.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FITBP trades at $23.60.
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 7.48, whereas FITBP's P/E ratio is 6.76. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FITBP's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check FITBP's competition here
WF vs CFG-PD 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 14.5B. In comparison, CFG-PD has a market cap of 14.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, 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 7.48, 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 +0.08%. 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.Check CFG-PD's competition here
WF vs BSAC 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 14.5B. In comparison, BSAC has a market cap of 14.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while BSAC trades at $31.40.
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 7.48, whereas BSAC's P/E ratio is 13.08. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BSAC's ROE of +0.21%. 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.Check BSAC's competition here
WF vs VLYPN 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 14.5B. In comparison, VLYPN has a market cap of 14.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while VLYPN trades at $26.02.
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 7.48, 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 +0.08%. 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.Check VLYPN's competition here
WF vs FHN-PC 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 14.5B. In comparison, FHN-PC has a market cap of 13.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FHN-PC trades at $28.17.
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 7.48, whereas FHN-PC's P/E ratio is 16.78. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN-PC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to FHN-PC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check FHN-PC's competition here
WF vs FITBO 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 14.5B. In comparison, FITBO has a market cap of 12.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FITBO trades at $18.32.
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 7.48, whereas FITBO's P/E ratio is 5.26. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FITBO's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check FITBO's competition here
WF vs FHN-PB 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 14.5B. In comparison, FHN-PB has a market cap of 12.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FHN-PB 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 7.48, whereas FHN-PB's P/E ratio is 14.88. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN-PB's ROE of +0.11%. 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.Check FHN-PB's competition here
WF vs FHN-PE 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 14.5B. In comparison, FHN-PE has a market cap of 12B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FHN-PE trades at $24.25.
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 7.48, whereas FHN-PE's P/E ratio is 14.43. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN-PE's ROE of +0.11%. 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.Check FHN-PE's competition here
WF vs WBS 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 14.5B. In comparison, WBS has a market cap of 11.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while WBS trades at $72.62.
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 7.48, whereas WBS's P/E ratio is 11.90. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WBS's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to WBS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check WBS's competition here
WF vs FHN 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 14.5B. In comparison, FHN has a market cap of 11.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FHN trades at $24.74.
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 7.48, whereas FHN's P/E ratio is 12.43. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FHN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check FHN's competition here
WF vs CMA 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 14.5B. In comparison, CMA has a market cap of 11.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CMA trades at $88.67.
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 7.48, whereas CMA's P/E ratio is 16.79. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CMA's ROE of +0.10%. 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.Check CMA's competition here
WF vs WTFC 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 14.5B. In comparison, WTFC has a market cap of 10.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while WTFC trades at $155.20.
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 7.48, whereas WTFC's P/E ratio is 13.01. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WTFC's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to WTFC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check WTFC's competition here
WF vs BPOP 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 14.5B. In comparison, BPOP has a market cap of 10.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while BPOP trades at $156.00.
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 7.48, whereas BPOP's P/E ratio is 11.54. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BPOP's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BPOP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BPOP's competition here
WF vs UMBF 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 14.5B. In comparison, UMBF has a market cap of 10B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while UMBF trades at $131.82.
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 7.48, whereas UMBF's P/E ratio is 11.53. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to UMBF's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to UMBF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check UMBF's competition here
WF vs ZION 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 14.5B. In comparison, ZION has a market cap of 9.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while ZION trades at $64.83.
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 7.48, whereas ZION's P/E ratio is 10.07. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ZION's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to ZION. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check ZION's competition here
WF vs ONBPO 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 14.5B. In comparison, ONBPO has a market cap of 9.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while ONBPO 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 7.48, whereas ONBPO's P/E ratio is 27.96. 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.Check ONBPO's competition here
WF vs ONBPP 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 14.5B. In comparison, ONBPP has a market cap of 9.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while ONBPP trades at $24.79.
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 7.48, whereas ONBPP's P/E ratio is 27.82. 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.Check ONBPP's competition here
WF vs ONB 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 14.5B. In comparison, ONB has a market cap of 9.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while ONB trades at $24.28.
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 7.48, whereas ONB's P/E ratio is 12.52. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ONB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to ONB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check ONB's competition here
WF vs SSB 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 14.5B. In comparison, SSB has a market cap of 9.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while SSB trades at $95.66.
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 7.48, whereas SSB's P/E ratio is 10.31. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SSB's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to SSB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check SSB's competition here
WF vs ZIONP 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 14.5B. In comparison, ZIONP has a market cap of 9.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while ZIONP trades at $18.80.
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 7.48, whereas ZIONP's P/E ratio is 3.04. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ZIONP's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to ZIONP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check ZIONP's competition here
WF vs CFR 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 14.5B. In comparison, CFR has a market cap of 9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CFR trades at $143.69.
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 7.48, whereas CFR's P/E ratio is 14.00. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CFR's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to CFR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check CFR's competition here
WF vs WAL 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 14.5B. In comparison, WAL has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while WAL trades at $81.90.
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 7.48, whereas WAL's P/E ratio is 9.53. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WAL's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to WAL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check WAL's competition here
WF vs FHN-PD 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 14.5B. In comparison, FHN-PD has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, 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 7.48, 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 +0.11%. 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.Check FHN-PD's competition here
WF vs WAL-PA 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 14.5B. In comparison, WAL-PA has a market cap of 8.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while WAL-PA trades at $24.05.
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 7.48, whereas WAL-PA's P/E ratio is 2.68. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WAL-PA's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to WAL-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check WAL-PA's competition here
WF vs FHN-PF 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 14.5B. In comparison, FHN-PF has a market cap of 8.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FHN-PF trades at $17.36.
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 7.48, whereas FHN-PF's P/E ratio is 10.33. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FHN-PF's ROE of +0.11%. 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.Check FHN-PF's competition here
WF vs GGAL 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 14.5B. In comparison, GGAL has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while GGAL trades at $49.99.
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 7.48, whereas GGAL's P/E ratio is 135.11. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GGAL's ROE of +0.01%. 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.Check GGAL's competition here
WF vs BOKF 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 14.5B. In comparison, BOKF has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while BOKF trades at $130.86.
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 7.48, whereas BOKF's P/E ratio is 13.27. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BOKF's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to BOKF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BOKF's competition here
WF vs CBSH 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 14.5B. In comparison, CBSH has a market cap of 7.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CBSH trades at $53.88.
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 7.48, whereas CBSH's P/E ratio is 13.24. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CBSH's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check CBSH's competition here
WF vs CADE 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 14.5B. In comparison, CADE has a market cap of 7.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CADE trades at $42.11.
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 7.48, whereas CADE's P/E ratio is 15.20. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CADE's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check CADE's competition here
WF vs VLY 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 14.5B. In comparison, VLY has a market cap of 7.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while VLY trades at $14.11.
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 7.48, whereas VLY's P/E ratio is 12.71. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to VLY's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to VLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check VLY's competition here
WF vs BSMX 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 14.5B. In comparison, BSMX has a market cap of 7.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, 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 7.48, 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.Check BSMX's competition here
WF vs PNFP 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 14.5B. In comparison, PNFP has a market cap of 7.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while PNFP trades at $95.20.
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 7.48, whereas PNFP's P/E ratio is 13.24. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PNFP's ROE of +0.07%. 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.Check PNFP's competition here
WF vs COLB 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 14.5B. In comparison, COLB has a market cap of 7.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while COLB trades at $30.15.
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 7.48, whereas COLB's P/E ratio is 11.82. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to COLB's ROE of +0.09%. 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.Check COLB's competition here
WF vs PB 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 14.5B. In comparison, PB has a market cap of 7.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while PB trades at $70.48.
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 7.48, whereas PB's P/E ratio is 12.77. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PB's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check PB's competition here
WF vs SNV 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 14.5B. In comparison, SNV has a market cap of 6.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while SNV trades at $50.05.
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 7.48, whereas SNV's P/E ratio is 9.37. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SNV's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to SNV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check SNV's competition here
WF vs CBC 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 14.5B. In comparison, CBC has a market cap of 6.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CBC trades at $28.59.
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 7.48, whereas CBC's P/E ratio is 16.06. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CBC's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to CBC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check CBC's competition here
WF vs SNV-PD 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 14.5B. In comparison, SNV-PD has a market cap of 6.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while SNV-PD 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 7.48, whereas SNV-PD's P/E ratio is 5.25. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SNV-PD's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check SNV-PD's competition here
WF vs CHYM 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 14.5B. In comparison, CHYM has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CHYM trades at $17.07.
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 7.48, whereas CHYM's P/E ratio is -4.12. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CHYM's ROE of -0.68%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to CHYM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check CHYM's competition here
WF vs CUBI-PE 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 14.5B. In comparison, CUBI-PE has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while CUBI-PE trades at $205.87.
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 7.48, whereas CUBI-PE's P/E ratio is 20.53. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CUBI-PE's ROE of +0.14%. 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.Check CUBI-PE's competition here
WF vs FNB 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 14.5B. In comparison, FNB has a market cap of 6.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FNB trades at $18.04.
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 7.48, whereas FNB's P/E ratio is 11.14. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FNB's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to FNB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check FNB's competition here
WF vs GBCI 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 14.5B. In comparison, GBCI has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while GBCI trades at $47.79.
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 7.48, whereas GBCI's P/E ratio is 22.32. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GBCI's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to GBCI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check GBCI's competition here
WF vs UBSI 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 14.5B. In comparison, UBSI has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while UBSI trades at $44.33.
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 7.48, whereas UBSI's P/E ratio is 12.42. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to UBSI's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to UBSI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check UBSI'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 14.5B. In comparison, AVAL has a market cap of 6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while AVAL trades at $5.09.
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 7.48, whereas AVAL's P/E ratio is 12.70. 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 FLG 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 14.5B. In comparison, FLG has a market cap of 5.9B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while FLG trades at $14.23.
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 7.48, whereas FLG's P/E ratio is -67.76. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FLG's ROE of -0.01%. 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.Check FLG's competition here
WF vs IFS 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 14.5B. In comparison, IFS has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while IFS trades at $52.55.
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 7.48, whereas IFS's P/E ratio is 9.74. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to IFS's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to IFS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check IFS's competition here
WF vs ABCB 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 14.5B. In comparison, ABCB has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while ABCB trades at $86.10.
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 7.48, whereas ABCB's P/E ratio is 13.54. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ABCB's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to ABCB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check ABCB's competition here
WF vs HWC 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 14.5B. In comparison, HWC has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while HWC trades at $70.10.
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 7.48, whereas HWC's P/E ratio is 14.42. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HWC's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HWC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check HWC's competition here
WF vs BMA 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 14.5B. In comparison, BMA has a market cap of 5.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while BMA trades at $88.00.
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 7.48, whereas BMA's P/E ratio is 21.92. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BMA's ROE of +0.00%. 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.Check BMA's competition here
WF vs OZK 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 14.5B. In comparison, OZK has a market cap of 5.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while OZK trades at $50.72.
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 7.48, whereas OZK's P/E ratio is 8.25. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to OZK's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to OZK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check OZK's competition here
WF vs AUB 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 14.5B. In comparison, AUB has a market cap of 5.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while AUB trades at $38.63.
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 7.48, whereas AUB's P/E ratio is 16.50. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AUB's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to AUB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check AUB's competition here
WF vs HOMB 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 14.5B. In comparison, HOMB has a market cap of 5.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while HOMB trades at $27.39.
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 7.48, whereas HOMB's P/E ratio is 11.27. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HOMB's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to HOMB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check HOMB's competition here
WF vs VLYPO 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 14.5B. In comparison, VLYPO has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while VLYPO trades at $25.07.
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 7.48, whereas VLYPO's P/E ratio is 22.58. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to VLYPO's ROE of +0.08%. 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.Check VLYPO's competition here
WF vs VLYPP 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 14.5B. In comparison, VLYPP has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while VLYPP trades at $25.10.
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 7.48, whereas VLYPP's P/E ratio is 22.60. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to VLYPP's ROE of +0.08%. 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.Check VLYPP's competition here
WF vs BXS 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 14.5B. In comparison, BXS has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, 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 7.48, 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 more volatile compared to BXS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check BXS's competition here
WF vs AX 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 14.5B. In comparison, AX has a market cap of 5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while AX trades at $88.36.
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 7.48, whereas AX's P/E ratio is 10.77. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AX's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is less volatile compared to AX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check AX's competition here
WF vs NYCB-PA 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 14.5B. In comparison, NYCB-PA has a market cap of 5B. Regarding current trading prices, WF is priced at $59.34, while NYCB-PA trades at $21.28.
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 7.48, whereas NYCB-PA's P/E ratio is 17.46. In terms of profitability, WF's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NYCB-PA's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, WF is more volatile compared to NYCB-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WF.Check NYCB-PA's competition here