CZFS
Price
$57.01
Change
+$0.91 (+1.62%)
Updated
Nov 13 closing price
Capitalization
275.84M
69 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
IBN
Price
$30.97
Change
+$0.43 (+1.41%)
Updated
Nov 13 closing price
Capitalization
111.79B
73 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

CZFS vs IBN

Header iconCZFS vs IBN Comparison
Open Charts CZFS vs IBNBanner chart's image
Citizens Financial Services
Price$57.01
Change+$0.91 (+1.62%)
Volume$13.49K
Capitalization275.84M
ICICI Bank
Price$30.97
Change+$0.43 (+1.41%)
Volume$5.02M
Capitalization111.79B
CZFS vs IBN Comparison Chart in %
CZFS
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
IBN
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CZFS vs. IBN commentary
Nov 14, 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 Hold and IBN is a StrongBuy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 14, 2025
Stock price -- (CZFS: $56.10 vs. IBN: $30.54)
Brand notoriety: CZFS and IBN are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CZFS: 97% vs. IBN: 63%
Market capitalization -- CZFS: $275.84M vs. IBN: $111.79B
CZFS [@Regional Banks] is valued at $275.84M. IBN’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $111.79B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $171.25B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $8.16B.

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 whileIBN’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • CZFS’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • IBN’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, IBN 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 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while IBN’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CZFS’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
  • IBN’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 7 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CZFS is a better buy in the short-term than IBN.

Price Growth

CZFS (@Regional Banks) experienced а -0.51% price change this week, while IBN (@Regional Banks) price change was +0.56% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was +0.97%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.50%, and the average quarterly price growth was +11.21%.

Reported Earning Dates

CZFS is expected to report earnings on Jan 22, 2026.

IBN is expected to report earnings on Jan 26, 2026.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+0.97% 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
IBN($112B) has a higher market cap than CZFS($276M). IBN has higher P/E ratio than CZFS: IBN (18.53) vs CZFS (8.08). IBN YTD gains are higher at: 3.086 vs. CZFS (-8.226). CZFS has less debt than IBN: CZFS (313M) vs IBN (2.15T). IBN has higher revenues than CZFS: IBN (2.1T) vs CZFS (105M).
CZFSIBNCZFS / IBN
Capitalization276M112B0%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD-8.2263.086-267%
P/E Ratio8.0818.5344%
Revenue105M2.1T0%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total Debt313M2.15T0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CZFS vs IBN: Fundamental Ratings
CZFS
IBN
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
1572
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
19
Undervalued
82
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
637
SMR RATING
1..100
431
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5860
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
8547
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
8550

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 (19) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for IBN (82) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that CZFS’s stock grew somewhat faster than IBN’s over the last 12 months.

IBN's Profit vs Risk Rating (7) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CZFS (63) in the null industry. This means that IBN’s stock grew somewhat faster than CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

IBN's SMR Rating (1) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CZFS (43) in the null industry. This means that IBN’s stock grew somewhat faster than CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

CZFS's Price Growth Rating (58) in the null industry is in the same range as IBN (60) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that CZFS’s stock grew similarly to IBN’s over the last 12 months.

IBN's P/E Growth Rating (47) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CZFS (85) in the null industry. This means that IBN’s stock grew somewhat faster than CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CZFSIBN
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
67%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
51%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
38%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
62%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
66%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
51%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
63%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
59%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
54%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
55%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
60%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
40%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 9 days ago
66%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
57%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 17 days ago
65%
Bearish Trend 8 days ago
41%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
39%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
56%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
48%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CZFS
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
IBN
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
SEMI32.430.08
+0.24%
Columbia Select Technology ETF
SPHQ74.400.17
+0.23%
Invesco S&P 500® Quality ETF
LTPZ53.640.04
+0.07%
PIMCO 15+ Year US TIPS ETF
SYSB90.02-0.07
-0.08%
iShares Systematic Bond ETF
KMLM26.72-0.08
-0.30%
KraneShares Mount LucasMgdFutsIdxStgyETF

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 71% 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%
-2.64%
MCBS - CZFS
71%
Closely correlated
-0.46%
PFIS - CZFS
70%
Closely correlated
-0.16%
BY - CZFS
69%
Closely correlated
+0.11%
CTBI - CZFS
69%
Closely correlated
+0.59%
FCF - CZFS
68%
Closely correlated
-0.69%
More

IBN and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, IBN has been loosely correlated with HDB. These tickers have moved in lockstep 66% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if IBN jumps, then HDB could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To IBN
1D Price
Change %
IBN100%
-0.75%
HDB - IBN
66%
Loosely correlated
-0.60%
SBNY - IBN
59%
Loosely correlated
N/A
NBHC - IBN
29%
Poorly correlated
-0.38%
CZFS - IBN
29%
Poorly correlated
-2.64%
MCBS - IBN
28%
Poorly correlated
-0.46%
More