Fulton Financial vs Hanmi Financial
FULT and HAFC side by side, both in commercial banks. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FULT and HAFC compare
Fulton Financial is the larger company, worth 4.7 times as much as Hanmi Financial ($4.6B against $968M).
On earnings, Hanmi Financial is cheaper: it trades at 10.7× trailing earnings, against 11.2× for Fulton Financial.
Hanmi Financial grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.3% versus 8.7% for Fulton Financial).
Fulton Financial keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 139% compared with 31.2% at Hanmi Financial.
Both pay dividends: Fulton Financial yields 3.2% and Hanmi Financial 3.4%.
Hanmi Financial scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 12 for Fulton Financial), 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 | FULT | HAFC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.6B | $968M |
| Share price | $23.99 | $32.65 |
| Change, 1 year | 35.1% | 21.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 44.1% | 39.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.85 | 0.77 |
| Employees | 3,400 | 610 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 11.2× | 10.7× (better) |
| P/S | 15.5× | 3.3× (better) |
| P/B | 1.2× | 1.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 6.6× |
| P/FCF | – | 5.4× |
| PEG | 1.47 | – |
| FCF yield | – | 18.6% |
| Fair value | $23.27 | $31.09 |
| Margin of safety | −3.1% (better) | −5.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.7% | 12.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.1% (better) | 3.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 14.3% | 25.4% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 12.6% | 27.2% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 14.0% (better) | 12.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | – | 31.2% |
| Net margin | 139% (better) | 31.2% |
| FCF margin | – | 61.8% |
| Return on equity | 11.6% (better) | 11.5% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 13.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Altman Z-score | 0.19 | 0.23 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.2% | 3.4% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 36.3% | 36.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 5.4% | 15.7% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 2.4% (better) | 1.7% |
| Shareholder yield | 5.6% (better) | 5.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 83.0% | 93.6% |
| Held by insiders | 1.3% | 2.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.5M | −$266K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 3.9% |
Go deeper
- FULT stock overview
- FULT income statement
- FULT valuation and score
- HAFC stock overview
- HAFC income statement
- HAFC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.