Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. PFS scored 82.0, NWG scored 77.0 — PFS leads.
Compare another set
PFS
Provident Financial Services, Inc.
Banks - Regional · Financial strength
73.3Fin
$22.04 · $2.9B
fundamentals as of
Strength gap
4.8
NWG leads
NWG
NatWest Group plc
Banks - Regional · Financial strength
78.1Fin
$17.65 · $69.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestNWG8.8x
Fastest growthPFS+25.3%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
PFS
NWG
+25.3%A-
Rev
+13.3%B+
9.2xA-
P/E
8.8xA-
11.1%B
ROE
14.8%B
0.99A-
P/B
1.34B+
4.3%B+
Yield
5.5%A-
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
The companies
PFSProvident Financial Services, Inc.
Banks - Regional · $22.04 · beta 0.82
Why now
Banks - Regional · market cap $2.9b. 14% off the 52-week high of $25.49. Revenue growing +25% — in hypergrowth territory. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $27.75 (implying +26% upside).
Moat
Net margin 35% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. Financial moat — scale of deposit base / underwriting franchise plus regulatory capital advantages. The largest players compound book value through cycles that erase smaller competitors.
Risk
Balance-sheet financial — book value, net interest margin, and credit loss provisions are the lever points; a rates regime change or a deterioration in the loan book moves the stock more than EPS does.
NWGNatWest Group plc
Banks - Regional · $17.65 · beta 0.82
Why now
Banks - Regional · market cap $69.9b. 9% off the 52-week high of $19.42. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 4 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $21.91 (implying +24% upside).
Moat
Net margin 38% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 15% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. $69.9b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Balance-sheet financial — book value, net interest margin, and credit loss provisions are the lever points; a rates regime change or a deterioration in the loan book moves the stock more than EPS does.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Common questions
Is PFS or NWG the better stock?
PFS scores higher: PFS 82.0, NWG 77.0 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
How are PFS and NWG scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.