At a Glance: The Q·Score

BAC scores 7.8 ("Bullish") against JPM's 7.4 ("Bullish") — a gap of 0.4 points. Both stocks sit comfortably in positive territory, so this is not a contrast between a strong and a weak name; it is a comparison of two well-regarded large-cap banks where the margin of difference is meaningful but not dramatic. A gap of this size typically signals that one stock holds a consistent edge across several dimensions rather than a single blowout category, and that is broadly what the underlying data shows here.

Quality — Profitability and Capital Efficiency

JPM leads on Quality. JPM's net profit margin — the percentage of revenue that converts into profit after all costs — stands at 34.9%, compared with BAC's 29.5%. That is a substantial gap: for every dollar of revenue JPM generates, it retains roughly five cents more in profit than BAC does. JPM's return on equity (ROE — a measure of how efficiently a company generates profit from shareholders' capital) is 17.8%, meaningfully ahead of BAC's 11.2%. In the context of large-cap banking, where ROEs of 10–15% are considered solid, JPM's figure is particularly strong. The Quality dimension clearly belongs to JPM on the numbers available.

Health — Balance Sheet and Execution

The data provided does not include debt/equity or current ratio figures for either bank — metrics that, for large financial institutions, require careful interpretation given the structural role of leverage in banking business models. Where the data does speak clearly is on EPS beat rate — the proportion of recent quarters in which a company's reported earnings per share exceeded analyst expectations. BAC's EPS beat rate is a perfect 100%, meaning it has consistently outperformed what analysts projected. JPM's beat rate of 75% is respectable but trails BAC's flawless record. On this execution metric, BAC holds the edge in Health, reflecting a pattern of delivering results that exceed the market's expectations.

Growth — Revenue, Earnings, and Surprise

JPM leads on Growth, and it is not close. JPM's revenue growth of 30.4% more than doubles BAC's 16.8%, and JPM's earnings growth of 46.9% is well ahead of BAC's 34.1%. To put those figures in context: double-digit revenue growth is already considered strong for a large, mature bank — JPM's 30.4% is exceptional for an institution of its size, with a market capitalisation approaching $927 billion. BAC's growth numbers are themselves healthy for the sector; they simply look modest in direct comparison. JPM's EPS surprise rate of 75% adds further support, though BAC's 100% beat rate complicates the picture slightly — BAC may be growing more slowly, but it is doing so with greater predictability relative to analyst forecasts. The Growth dimension, however, goes decisively to JPM.

Valuation — Price Relative to Fundamentals

BAC leads on Valuation. BAC trades at a forward P/E — the stock price divided by projected earnings per share for the coming year — of 10.9x, compared with JPM's 14.0x. In the large-cap banking sector, forward P/E ratios typically range from roughly 10x to 15x, with premium franchises commanding the higher end of that band. JPM's 14.0x reflects the market's willingness to pay up for its superior growth and profitability profile. BAC's 10.9x sits closer to the lower end of the sector range. On analyst consensus price targets, BAC's implied upside — the percentage gap between the current price and the average analyst target — is 19.2% from its current price of $57.90, while JPM's implied upside is 7.8% from $348.92. BAC also sits at a position in its 52-week range that, combined with the larger implied upside, gives the Valuation dimension to BAC by a clear margin.

Sentiment — Analyst Consensus

BAC leads on Sentiment, and by a wide margin. Of the 21 analysts covering BAC, 83% carry a positive rating on the stock. JPM is covered by the same number of analysts — 21 — but only 54% hold a positive rating. That is a striking divergence for two banks in the same sector with similar Q·Score labels. One plausible interpretation: JPM's strong growth and profitability are already well-recognised and, at a higher valuation multiple, some analysts may view the upside as more limited — consistent with its modest 7.8% implied upside figure. BAC's broader analyst enthusiasm aligns with its larger implied upside of 19.2% and its lower valuation multiple. The Sentiment dimension goes clearly to BAC, and it is the dimension where the gap between the two stocks is most pronounced.

What the Data Shows

BAC's higher overall Q·Score of 7.8 versus JPM's 7.4 is driven primarily by its advantages in Valuation and Sentiment — two dimensions where BAC's lower price multiple and stronger analyst consensus outweigh JPM's commanding lead in Growth and Quality. The Growth and Quality dimensions belong unambiguously to JPM, which posts superior revenue growth (30.4% vs 16.8%), earnings growth (46.9% vs 34.1%), profit margin (34.9% vs 29.5%), and return on equity (17.8% vs 11.2%). The Health dimension, where execution data is the primary available signal, edges toward BAC on the strength of its perfect EPS beat rate. What makes this comparison particularly instructive is that neither stock dominates across the board — the Q·Score gap of 0.4 points reflects a genuine trade-off between a faster-growing, more profitable franchise and one that screens as more attractively priced relative to expectations.

Explore the Full Comparison

The live, interactive breakdown — updated in real time — is available at quantify.biz/compare/bac-vs-jpm.