Quick verdict: BMA vs FNB in 2026

F.N.B. Corporation (FNB) emerges as the stronger contender overall in this stock comparison, demonstrating a clear advantage across most fundamental metrics. FNB is the definitive growth leader with positive revenue expansion, while BMA has experienced a significant decline. Furthermore, FNB stands out as the value leader, presenting much more attractive valuation ratios compared to BMA, and also holds the lead in profitability, showcasing superior margins. Although analysts show a stronger collective preference for FNB, BMA does show a significantly higher potential price target upside according to current analyst consensus. Not investment advice.

BMA vs FNB: key metrics side by side

Full side-by-side comparison of BMA and FNB across valuation, profitability, growth and analyst sentiment. Data updated 2026-05-03.

BMA vs FNB valuation comparison

FNB presents a vastly more appealing valuation profile when considering traditional metrics, making it a clear choice for investors focused on BMA vs FNB valuation. Banco Macro S.A. (BMA) currently trades at a P/E ratio of 43.02x, which is considerably higher than F.N.B. Corporation’s (FNB) P/E ratio of 10.87x. This significant disparity suggests that FNB’s earnings are available at a much lower price point, indicating a more attractive entry for value-oriented investors. Delving deeper, the price-to-book (P/B) ratio further highlights this contrast: BMA’s P/B stands at an exceptionally high 1920.9x, implying that its market value is massively inflated compared to its book value. In stark contrast, FNB boasts a P/B ratio of just 0.94x, suggesting it trades below its tangible book value, which often signals a potential undervaluation or a strong asset base relative to its market capitalization.

The discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis reinforces FNB’s compelling valuation advantage. BMA’s DCF calculation indicates a potential downside of -34.5% from its current price ($68.86 vs DCF $45.11), suggesting that it may be significantly overvalued based on its future cash flow projections. Conversely, FNB’s DCF analysis points to an astounding upside of +422.5% from its current price ($17.66 vs DCF $92.28), implying substantial undervaluation and significant potential for price appreciation if the company achieves its projected cash flows. This vast difference in DCF outlook strongly suggests that FNB is the cheaper and potentially more rewarding investment from a long-term intrinsic value perspective compared to BMA. For investors seeking a stock with a robust margin of safety and considerable upside based on fundamental valuation, FNB clearly holds the advantage in the BMA vs FNB valuation landscape.

BMA vs FNB growth comparison

When evaluating BMA vs FNB growth, the two companies exhibit dramatically different trajectories in their recent performance. Banco Macro S.A. (BMA) has experienced a severe year-over-year revenue decline of -99.9%, which is a significant red flag for any growth-focused investor. Such a drastic contraction in revenue indicates substantial operational challenges or adverse market conditions impacting BMA’s core business, potentially signalling a struggle to adapt or a highly volatile operating environment. This negative growth momentum suggests that BMA is currently struggling to maintain, let alone expand, its revenue base, making it a risky proposition for those prioritizing top-line expansion and consistent growth.

In contrast, F.N.B. Corporation (FNB) demonstrates positive, albeit modest, revenue growth of +4.9% year-over-year. While this growth rate may not be considered explosive, it signifies resilience and an ability to expand its operations in the current economic climate, particularly within the financial services sector. This steady, positive trend reflects stronger business momentum for FNB compared to BMA, indicating a company that is successfully navigating its market. For investors keen on consistent expansion and a company with a proven capacity for revenue generation, FNB’s performance provides a much more reassuring outlook. The stark difference in revenue growth between BMA’s substantial decline and FNB’s steady increase positions FNB as the clear leader in terms of growth momentum and stability for 2026.

BMA vs FNB profitability

In terms of BMA vs FNB profitability, F.N.B. Corporation (FNB) stands out as the significantly more efficient and profitable enterprise. FNB boasts an impressive net margin of 21.63%, indicating that a substantial portion of its revenue translates directly into profit for shareholders. This high net margin speaks to robust cost management and strong operational efficiency within FNB’s business model, demonstrating its ability to convert sales into significant earnings. On the other hand, Banco Macro S.A. (BMA) lags considerably with a net margin of just 4.07%. This much lower figure suggests that BMA retains a much smaller percentage of its revenue as profit, which could be due to higher operational costs, greater competitive pressures, or other inefficiencies impacting its bottom line.

Further highlighting FNB’s superior profitability is its EBITDA margin of 27.06%, which is far greater than BMA’s 10.32%. The EBITDA margin provides insight into a company’s operational profitability before the impact of interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization, and FNB’s lead here reinforces its operational strength and core business efficiency. When examining Free Cash Flow (FCF) yield, FNB also demonstrates a stronger capacity to generate cash, with a FCF yield of 5.99% compared to BMA’s 4.54%. A higher FCF yield suggests that FNB is generating more cash relative to its market capitalization, which is crucial for funding growth initiatives, reducing debt, or returning capital to shareholders. Both companies show “N/A%” for Return on Equity (ROE), preventing a direct comparison on that specific metric. However, based on net margin, EBITDA margin, and FCF yield, FNB clearly generates more cash and is the more profitable entity, offering better returns from its operations.

Analyst ratings: BMA vs FNB

The analyst community offers differing degrees of conviction when assessing BMA vs FNB. For F.N.B. Corporation (FNB), a higher percentage of analysts, specifically 68.4% out of 19 analysts, have issued a “Buy” rating. This strong majority consensus among a larger pool of analysts suggests a robust positive sentiment surrounding FNB’s future prospects and current valuation. Their average price target for FNB is $20.5, representing a modest but positive upside of +16.1% from its current price of $17.66. This indicates that while analysts see continued growth, they believe a significant portion of FNB’s value is already priced in, consistent with its more attractive valuation metrics.

Conversely, Banco Macro S.A. (BMA) has a lower percentage of “Buy” ratings, with 42.9% out of 14 analysts recommending a purchase. Despite this lower conviction rate, the analyst consensus price target for BMA is $130, which implies a substantial upside of +88.8% from its current price of $68.86. This striking difference in implied upside suggests that while fewer analysts are bullish on BMA, those who are see significantly greater potential for price appreciation if the company can overcome its current challenges and reach its perceived fair value. Therefore, while analysts show a stronger *collective preference* for FNB based on the higher percentage of buy ratings, BMA is favored by some for its *potential for explosive growth* if its intrinsic value target is met.

Should I buy BMA or FNB stock in 2026?

Deciding whether to buy BMA or FNB stock in 2026 involves weighing very different investment profiles and risk appetites. For growth investors, F.N.B. Corporation (FNB) appears to be the more prudent choice. FNB demonstrated positive revenue growth of 4.9% year-over-year, indicating a healthy and expanding business within a stable operating environment. This stands in stark contrast to Banco Macro S.A. (BMA), which reported a substantial -99.9% revenue decline. Such a severe contraction for BMA signals significant operational headwinds or market challenges, making it a very high-risk proposition for those seeking consistent top-line expansion. FNB’s more stable growth, combined with its superior profitability margins, suggests a company with better momentum and a more reliable growth trajectory in the financial services sector.

From a value investment perspective, FNB clearly outperforms BMA, especially when examining BMA vs FNB fundamentals and valuation. FNB boasts a highly attractive P/E ratio of 10.87x and a P/B ratio of 0.94x, indicating that the stock is potentially undervalued or fairly priced relative to its earnings and assets. Furthermore, its DCF analysis suggests an impressive upside of +422.5%, implying substantial intrinsic value waiting to be realized. BMA, on the other hand, presents a significantly higher P/E of 43.02x and an extraordinary P/B of 1920.9x, along with a negative DCF upside of -34.5%. These metrics collectively suggest that BMA is trading at a premium that is difficult to justify with its current fundamentals, presenting a much riskier value proposition for investors looking for BMA vs FNB fundamentals and valuation.

For investors prioritizing income through dividends, neither BMA nor FNB offers a particularly compelling yield, as both are very low. BMA has a slightly higher dividend yield of 0.05% compared to FNB’s 0.03%. While marginally better, this difference is negligible and neither stock would be considered a primary choice for a robust dividend-focused portfolio. Income-seeking investors would likely find better opportunities elsewhere that offer more substantial and consistent dividend payouts. In conclusion, for growth and value considerations, FNB appears to be the more robust and attractive investment in 2026, offering a better balance of growth, profitability, and reasonable valuation. This is not investment advice; always conduct your own thorough research.

More BMA and FNB comparisons

BMA full stock analysis · FNB full stock analysis · All stock comparisons

FAQ: BMA vs FNB