CZFS
Price
$57.49
Change
+$1.31 (+2.33%)
Updated
Oct 8, 04:59 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
270.07M
19 days until earnings call
MBWM
Price
$45.13
Change
-$0.21 (-0.46%)
Updated
Oct 8, 04:59 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
736.71M
13 days until earnings call
Interact to see
Advertisement

CZFS vs MBWM

Header iconCZFS vs MBWM Comparison
Open Charts CZFS vs MBWMBanner chart's image
Citizens Financial Services
Price$57.49
Change+$1.31 (+2.33%)
Volume$100
Capitalization270.07M
Mercantile Bank
Price$45.13
Change-$0.21 (-0.46%)
Volume$600
Capitalization736.71M
CZFS vs MBWM Comparison Chart in %
CZFS
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MBWM
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CZFS vs. MBWM commentary
Oct 09, 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 CZFS is a Buy and MBWM is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Oct 09, 2025
Stock price -- (CZFS: $56.18 vs. MBWM: $45.34)
Brand notoriety: CZFS and MBWM are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CZFS: 126% vs. MBWM: 165%
Market capitalization -- CZFS: $270.07M vs. MBWM: $736.71M
CZFS [@Regional Banks] is valued at $270.07M. MBWM’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $736.71M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $170.11B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $7.86B.

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).

CZFS’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMBWM’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

  • CZFS’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • MBWM’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
According to our system of comparison, MBWM is a better buy in the long-term than CZFS.

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.

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

  • CZFS’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.
  • MBWM’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CZFS is a better buy in the short-term than MBWM.

Price Growth

CZFS (@Regional Banks) experienced а -6.80% price change this week, while MBWM (@Regional Banks) price change was +0.76% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was +0.18%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.02%, and the average quarterly price growth was +20.36%.

Reported Earning Dates

CZFS is expected to report earnings on Oct 27, 2025.

MBWM is expected to report earnings on Oct 21, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+0.18% 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
MBWM($737M) has a higher market cap than CZFS($270M). MBWM has higher P/E ratio than CZFS: MBWM (9.01) vs CZFS (8.54). MBWM YTD gains are higher at: 4.432 vs. CZFS (-8.095). CZFS has less debt than MBWM: CZFS (313M) vs MBWM (496M). MBWM has higher revenues than CZFS: MBWM (235M) vs CZFS (105M).
CZFSMBWMCZFS / MBWM
Capitalization270M737M37%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD-8.0954.432-183%
P/E Ratio8.549.0195%
Revenue105M235M45%
Total CashN/A98.9M-
Total Debt313M496M63%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CZFS vs MBWM: Fundamental Ratings
CZFS
MBWM
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
7057
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
21
Undervalued
31
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
6518
SMR RATING
1..100
4426
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
6059
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
6645
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a90

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.

CZFS's Valuation (21) in the null industry is in the same range as MBWM (31) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that CZFS’s stock grew similarly to MBWM’s over the last 12 months.

MBWM's Profit vs Risk Rating (18) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CZFS (65) in the null industry. This means that MBWM’s stock grew somewhat faster than CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

MBWM's SMR Rating (26) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as CZFS (44) in the null industry. This means that MBWM’s stock grew similarly to CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

MBWM's Price Growth Rating (59) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as CZFS (60) in the null industry. This means that MBWM’s stock grew similarly to CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

MBWM's P/E Growth Rating (45) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as CZFS (66) in the null industry. This means that MBWM’s stock grew similarly to CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CZFSMBWM
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
37%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
58%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
68%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
47%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
62%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
43%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
62%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
52%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
70%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
55%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
54%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
67%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
66%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 9 days ago
65%
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
60%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
65%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
67%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
60%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
49%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CZFS
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MBWM
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
MYTEF1.64N/A
N/A
Telekom Malaysia Berhad
BWEFF3.40N/A
N/A
BW Energy Limited
ENDI18.00N/A
N/A
ENDI Corp.
SOSAF1.01N/A
N/A
SoSTravel.com S.p.A
CMCLF2.14N/A
-0.23%
CMOC GROUP LTD

CZFS and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CZFS has been closely correlated with MCBS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 72% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if CZFS jumps, then MCBS could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CZFS
1D Price
Change %
CZFS100%
-2.87%
MCBS - CZFS
72%
Closely correlated
-0.70%
PFIS - CZFS
71%
Closely correlated
-1.73%
MBWM - CZFS
69%
Closely correlated
-0.87%
HTB - CZFS
69%
Closely correlated
-1.05%
AROW - CZFS
69%
Closely correlated
-0.97%
More