CBFV
Price
$28.86
Change
-$0.37 (-1.27%)
Updated
May 23 closing price
Capitalization
111.19M
61 days until earnings call
UMBF
Price
$101.50
Change
-$0.87 (-0.85%)
Updated
May 23 closing price
Capitalization
4.12B
66 days until earnings call
Interact to see
Advertisement

CBFV vs UMBF

Header iconCBFV vs UMBF Comparison
Open Charts CBFV vs UMBFBanner chart's image
CB Financial Services
Price$28.86
Change-$0.37 (-1.27%)
Volume$10.82K
Capitalization111.19M
UMB Financial
Price$101.50
Change-$0.87 (-0.85%)
Volume$634.13K
Capitalization4.12B
CBFV vs UMBF Comparison Chart
Loading...
CBFV
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
UMBF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CBFV vs. UMBF commentary
May 25, 2025

To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is CBFV is a Buy and UMBF is a StrongBuy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
May 25, 2025
Stock price -- (CBFV: $28.86 vs. UMBF: $101.50)
Brand notoriety: CBFV and UMBF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CBFV: 72% vs. UMBF: 106%
Market capitalization -- CBFV: $111.19M vs. UMBF: $4.12B
CBFV [@Regional Banks] is valued at $111.19M. UMBF’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $4.12B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $133.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $6B.

Long-Term Analysis

It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).

CBFV’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileUMBF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • CBFV’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
  • UMBF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, CBFV is a better buy in the long-term than UMBF.

Short-Term Analysis

It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.

If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.

CBFV’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while UMBF’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CBFV’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • UMBF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CBFV is a better buy in the short-term than UMBF.

Price Growth

CBFV (@Regional Banks) experienced а -1.95% price change this week, while UMBF (@Regional Banks) price change was -5.18% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -0.93%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.32%, and the average quarterly price growth was +4.15%.

Reported Earning Dates

CBFV is expected to report earnings on Jul 24, 2025.

UMBF is expected to report earnings on Jul 29, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (-0.93% weekly)

Regional banks have a smaller reach than major banks, and cater mostly to one region of a country, such as a state or within a group of states. They offer services often similar – albeit with some limitations/smaller scale – compared to major banks. Taking deposits, making loans, mortgages, leases, credit cards , fund management, insurance and investment banking. SunTrust Banks, State Street Corp., M&T Bank Corp. are some examples of U.S. regional banks.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
UMBF($4.12B) has a higher market cap than CBFV($111M). UMBF has higher P/E ratio than CBFV: UMBF (11.78) vs CBFV (4.89). CBFV YTD gains are higher at: 2.671 vs. UMBF (-9.715). CBFV has less debt than UMBF: CBFV (34.7M) vs UMBF (1.38B). UMBF has higher revenues than CBFV: UMBF (1.33B) vs CBFV (42.4M).
CBFVUMBFCBFV / UMBF
Capitalization111M4.12B3%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD2.671-9.715-27%
P/E Ratio4.8911.7842%
Revenue42.4M1.33B3%
Total CashN/A447M-
Total Debt34.7M1.38B3%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CBFV vs UMBF: Fundamental Ratings
CBFV
UMBF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8674
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
55
Fair valued
68
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
3038
SMR RATING
1..100
198
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4852
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
430
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5050

Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.

CBFV's Valuation (55) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as UMBF (68). This means that CBFV’s stock grew similarly to UMBF’s over the last 12 months.

CBFV's Profit vs Risk Rating (30) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as UMBF (38). This means that CBFV’s stock grew similarly to UMBF’s over the last 12 months.

UMBF's SMR Rating (8) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as CBFV (19). This means that UMBF’s stock grew similarly to CBFV’s over the last 12 months.

CBFV's Price Growth Rating (48) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as UMBF (52). This means that CBFV’s stock grew similarly to UMBF’s over the last 12 months.

CBFV's P/E Growth Rating (4) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as UMBF (30). This means that CBFV’s stock grew similarly to UMBF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CBFVUMBF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
72%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
62%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
73%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
60%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
64%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
45%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
59%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
48%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
63%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
44%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
65%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
62%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
51%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
64%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
53%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
56%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
68%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CBFV
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
UMBF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
FSSKX77.51N/A
N/A
Fidelity Stock Selec-Class K
HUDEX22.92N/A
N/A
Huber Large Cap Value Inst
PMDIX17.93N/A
N/A
Principal Small-MidCap Dividend Inc Inst
HRMDX13.11N/A
N/A
Heartland Mid Cap Value Investor
VSSVX10.21-0.07
-0.68%
VALIC Company I Small Cap Special Val

CBFV and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CBFV has been loosely correlated with WSFS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 45% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CBFV jumps, then WSFS could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CBFV
1D Price
Change %
CBFV100%
-1.27%
WSFS - CBFV
45%
Loosely correlated
-0.34%
FIBK - CBFV
45%
Loosely correlated
+0.68%
UBFO - CBFV
45%
Loosely correlated
-0.91%
UMBF - CBFV
45%
Loosely correlated
-0.85%
EBC - CBFV
44%
Loosely correlated
-0.87%
More