CZFS
Price
$58.46
Change
-$0.20 (-0.34%)
Updated
Dec 26, 02:43 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
281.94M
27 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
IBTN
Price
$27.50
Change
-$0.40 (-1.43%)
Updated
Dec 23 closing price
Capitalization
79.86M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

CZFS vs IBTN

Header iconCZFS vs IBTN Comparison
Open Charts CZFS vs IBTNBanner chart's image
Citizens Financial Services
Price$58.46
Change-$0.20 (-0.34%)
Volume$100
Capitalization281.94M
Ins
Price$27.50
Change-$0.40 (-1.43%)
Volume$6.95K
Capitalization79.86M
CZFS vs IBTN Comparison Chart in %
CZFS
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
IBTN
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CZFS vs. IBTN commentary
Dec 26, 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 IBTN is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 26, 2025
Stock price -- (CZFS: $58.66 vs. IBTN: $27.50)
Brand notoriety: CZFS and IBTN are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CZFS: 75% vs. IBTN: 191%
Market capitalization -- CZFS: $281.94M vs. IBTN: $79.86M
CZFS [@Regional Banks] is valued at $281.94M. IBTN’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $79.86M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $171.46B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $8.65B.

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 whileIBTN’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • CZFS’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • IBTN’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, both CZFS and IBTN are a good buy in the long-term.

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 IBTN’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

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

Price Growth

CZFS (@Regional Banks) experienced а -5.52% price change this week, while IBTN (@Regional Banks) price change was -0.72% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was +0.01%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +5.44%, and the average quarterly price growth was +15.56%.

Reported Earning Dates

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

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+0.01% 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
CZFS($282M) has a higher market cap than IBTN($79.9M). IBTN has higher P/E ratio than CZFS: IBTN (10.58) vs CZFS (8.26). IBTN YTD gains are higher at: 11.514 vs. CZFS (-4.038). IBTN has less debt than CZFS: IBTN (40.7M) vs CZFS (280M). CZFS has higher revenues than IBTN: CZFS (109M) vs IBTN (25.4M).
CZFSIBTNCZFS / IBTN
Capitalization282M79.9M353%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD-4.03811.514-35%
P/E Ratio8.2610.5878%
Revenue109M25.4M429%
Total CashN/A7.69M-
Total Debt280M40.7M688%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CZFS vs IBTN: Fundamental Ratings
CZFS
IBTN
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
6850
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
19
Undervalued
98
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
6317
SMR RATING
1..100
4458
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5754
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
8037
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5065

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 significantly better than the same rating for IBTN (98). This means that CZFS’s stock grew significantly faster than IBTN’s over the last 12 months.

IBTN's Profit vs Risk Rating (17) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CZFS (63). This means that IBTN’s stock grew somewhat faster than CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

CZFS's SMR Rating (44) in the null industry is in the same range as IBTN (58). This means that CZFS’s stock grew similarly to IBTN’s over the last 12 months.

IBTN's Price Growth Rating (54) in the null industry is in the same range as CZFS (57). This means that IBTN’s stock grew similarly to CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

IBTN's P/E Growth Rating (37) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CZFS (80). This means that IBTN’s stock grew somewhat faster than CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CZFSIBTN
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
50%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
63%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
55%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
49%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
45%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
19%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
52%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
25%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
54%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
17%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
61%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
19%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 10 days ago
65%
Bullish Trend 9 days ago
52%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
64%
Bearish Trend 19 days ago
15%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
51%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
50%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
54%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
23%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CZFS
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
IBTN
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
YORKF0.100.03
+53.37%
NAUGHTY VENTURES CORP
EJPRY13.260.16
+1.22%
East Japan Railway Co.
LTGHY2.740.02
+0.58%
Life Healthcare Group Holdings Ltd
CCNB12.50N/A
N/A
Coastal Carolina Bancshares Inc
LFDJF27.55N/A
N/A
LA FRANCAISE DES JEUX

CZFS and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CZFS has been loosely correlated with MCBS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 66% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some 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%
-0.10%
MCBS - CZFS
66%
Loosely correlated
+0.11%
PFIS - CZFS
65%
Loosely correlated
+0.60%
BY - CZFS
63%
Loosely correlated
+0.20%
HBCP - CZFS
63%
Loosely correlated
-0.07%
PCB - CZFS
63%
Loosely correlated
+0.18%
More

IBTN and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that IBTN and BKEAF have been poorly correlated (+27% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that IBTN and BKEAF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To IBTN
1D Price
Change %
IBTN100%
N/A
BKEAF - IBTN
27%
Poorly correlated
N/A
VBNK - IBTN
22%
Poorly correlated
+0.13%
CZFS - IBTN
22%
Poorly correlated
-0.10%
CFBK - IBTN
21%
Poorly correlated
+0.77%
HSNGF - IBTN
13%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More