Central Pacific Financial vs Mechanics Bancorp
CPF and MCHB side by side, both in commercial banks. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CPF and MCHB compare
Mechanics Bancorp is the larger company, worth 3.2 times as much as Central Pacific Financial ($3.2B against $988M).
On earnings, Central Pacific Financial is cheaper: it trades at 11.7× trailing earnings, against 12.3× for Mechanics Bancorp.
Central Pacific Financial grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (31.1% versus −0.68% for Mechanics Bancorp).
Mechanics Bancorp keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 515% compared with 165% at Central Pacific Financial.
Both pay dividends: Central Pacific Financial yields 3.0% and Mechanics Bancorp 10.8%.
Central Pacific Financial scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 15 for Mechanics Bancorp), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | CPF | MCHB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $988M | $3.2B |
| Share price | $38.82 | $14.40 |
| Change, 1 year | 31.6% | 9.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 39.9% | −72.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.73 | 0.94 |
| Employees | 763 | 1,971 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 15 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 11.7× (better) | 12.3× |
| P/S | 18.7× (better) | 63.4× |
| P/B | 1.7× | 1.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 9.4× (better) | 16.3× |
| PEG | 5.35 | 0.22 (better) |
| FCF yield | 10.6% (better) | 6.1% |
| Fair value | $34.16 | $30.84 |
| Margin of safety | −13.6% | 53.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 31.1% (better) | −0.68% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 16.8% (better) | −32.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 32.2% (better) | 25.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 36.2% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 16.7% | 31.3% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 165% | 515% (better) |
| FCF margin | 198% | 388% (better) |
| Return on equity | 14.9% (better) | 9.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Altman Z-score | 0.14 (better) | 0.13 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.0% | 10.8% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 34.7% | 139% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 3.4% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 3.0% | 10.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.2% | 11.1% |
| Held by insiders | 11.1% | 82.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$30 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.8% | 12.1% |
Go deeper
- CPF stock overview
- CPF income statement
- CPF valuation and score
- MCHB stock overview
- MCHB income statement
- MCHB valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.