FFBC
Price
$25.58
Change
+$0.47 (+1.87%)
Updated
Dec 3 closing price
Capitalization
2.52B
49 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
LRCDF
Price
$28.67
Change
+$4.58 (+19.01%)
Updated
Dec 2 closing price
Capitalization
1.07B
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

FFBC vs LRCDF

Header iconFFBC vs LRCDF Comparison
Open Charts FFBC vs LRCDFBanner chart's image
First Financial Ban
Price$25.58
Change+$0.47 (+1.87%)
Volume$703.17K
Capitalization2.52B
Laurentian Bank of Canada
Price$28.67
Change+$4.58 (+19.01%)
Volume$22.94K
Capitalization1.07B
FFBC vs LRCDF Comparison Chart in %
FFBC
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
LRCDF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
FFBC vs. LRCDF commentary
Dec 04, 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 FFBC is a Hold and LRCDF is a StrongBuy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 04, 2025
Stock price -- (FFBC: $25.11 vs. LRCDF: $24.09)
Brand notoriety: FFBC and LRCDF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: FFBC: 44% vs. LRCDF: 32%
Market capitalization -- FFBC: $2.52B vs. LRCDF: $1.07B
FFBC [@Regional Banks] is valued at $2.52B. LRCDF’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $1.07B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $171.16B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $8.26B.

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).

FFBC’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileLRCDF’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

FFBC’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while LRCDF’s TA Score has 6 bullish TA indicator(s).

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

Price Growth

FFBC (@Regional Banks) experienced а -0.48% price change this week, while LRCDF (@Regional Banks) price change was +1.69% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was +0.92%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.06%, and the average quarterly price growth was +13.89%.

Reported Earning Dates

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

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+0.92% 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
FFBC($2.52B) has a higher market cap than LRCDF($1.07B). LRCDF has higher P/E ratio than FFBC: LRCDF (11.03) vs FFBC (9.47). LRCDF YTD gains are higher at: 20.631 vs. FFBC (-3.907). FFBC has less debt than LRCDF: FFBC (1.03B) vs LRCDF (15.6B). LRCDF has higher revenues than FFBC: LRCDF (975M) vs FFBC (852M).
FFBCLRCDFFFBC / LRCDF
Capitalization2.52B1.07B235%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD-3.90720.631-19%
P/E Ratio9.4711.0386%
Revenue852M975M87%
Total Cash210MN/A-
Total Debt1.03B15.6B7%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
FFBC vs LRCDF: Fundamental Ratings
FFBC
LRCDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
38
Fair valued
16
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
2982
SMR RATING
1..100
1514
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5648
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
7733
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.

LRCDF's Valuation (16) in the null industry is in the same range as FFBC (38) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that LRCDF’s stock grew similarly to FFBC’s over the last 12 months.

FFBC's Profit vs Risk Rating (29) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LRCDF (82) in the null industry. This means that FFBC’s stock grew somewhat faster than LRCDF’s over the last 12 months.

LRCDF's SMR Rating (14) in the null industry is in the same range as FFBC (15) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that LRCDF’s stock grew similarly to FFBC’s over the last 12 months.

LRCDF's Price Growth Rating (48) in the null industry is in the same range as FFBC (56) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that LRCDF’s stock grew similarly to FFBC’s over the last 12 months.

LRCDF's P/E Growth Rating (33) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for FFBC (77) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that LRCDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than FFBC’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
FFBCLRCDF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
51%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
61%
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
44%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
53%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
53%
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
43%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
46%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
56%
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
47%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 13 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
44%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
61%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
76%
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
41%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
67%
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
44%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
FFBC
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
LRCDF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
IAXAX7.87N/A
N/A
VY® T. Rowe Price Divers Mid Cap Gr A
CDEYX19.38N/A
N/A
Columbia Intrinsic Value Institutional 3
WISGX23.55N/A
N/A
Segall Bryant & Hamill Small Cap GrInstl
TIBOX32.34N/A
N/A
Thornburg Investment Income Builder R6
TBLRX13.02N/A
N/A
Transamerica Balanced II R

LRCDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that LRCDF and SFBS have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LRCDF and SFBS's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LRCDF
1D Price
Change %
LRCDF100%
N/A
SFBS - LRCDF
28%
Poorly correlated
-1.19%
CATY - LRCDF
27%
Poorly correlated
-0.80%
BANR - LRCDF
27%
Poorly correlated
-0.45%
KBCSY - LRCDF
27%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FFBC - LRCDF
25%
Poorly correlated
+0.52%
More