BANF vs BOKF Stock Comparison
BancFirst Corporation vs BOK Financial Corporation
BANF leads
BANF leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from BOKF.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support BANF, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
BancFirst Corporation
BOK Financial Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BANF over BOKF, 53 versus 51 as of Sep 5, 2026. BANF's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while BOKF holds the stronger value profile. BANF also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BANF today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. BANF lead: Reversed — BOKF led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BANF now leads by 2.
Compare BancFirst Corporation and BOK Financial Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare BANF and BOKF against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality30%73 vs 58BANF +15
- Value30%40 vs 54BOKF +14
- Momentum25%42 vs 30BANF +12
- Risk Resilience15%60 vs 65BOKF +5
2 of 6 evidence groups favor BANF. BANF’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; BOKF keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Momentum +13
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
No new signals fired.
The lead changed hands: BANF moved ahead of BOKF in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BANF and BOKF both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BANF (BancFirst Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
BOKF (BOK Financial Corporation): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, valuation.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
BANFBANF on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
BOKFBOKF on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BOKFBOKF on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 points.
Momentum
BANFBANF on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
BOKFBOKF on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
BANFBANF on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | BANF | BOKF | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10.7% | +8.5% | BANF has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +11.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 4 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BANF. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 53 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | BANFon balance | revenue growth -24.3% vs 6%; EPS growth 5.3% vs 14%; TTM ROE 13.4% vs 10.8%; gross margin 90.5% vs 66.1%; operating margin 41.1% vs 23.4% — BANF takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BOKF | Value 40 vs 54 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -0.7% vs -2.8%; vs 200-day 0.9% vs 4.6% |
| Risk Resilience | BOKF | Risk Resilience 60 vs 65 |
| Analyst expectations | BANF | Target upside 10.7% vs 8.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BANF and BOKF and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on BANF.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4BANF lead: Reversed — BOKF led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BANF now leads by 2.
- Today
- BANF +2
- 53 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- BANF +2
- 52 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- BOKF +3
- 58 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- BOKF +4
- 58 vs 62
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Sep 4 when BANF moved ahead of BOKF.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.60%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.63%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
BANF leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.02%, AIQ +3 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.47%, AIQ 0 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1BOKF closes the Quality gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to BANF's edge.
- 2BOKF's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3BANF's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
BANF leads on balance| Metric | BANF | BOKF |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -24.3% | 6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 5.3% | 14% |
| Gross margin | 90.5% | 66.1% |
| Operating margin | 41.1% | 23.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.4% | 10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.05 | 0.82 |
Performance
BOKF leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BANF | BOKF |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.1% | -0.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.1% | -4.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 2.3% | 5.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.7% | 8.9% |
| Year to date | 6.5% | 15.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -15.5% | 22% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | BANF | BOKF |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 43 | 24.6 |
| ADX (14) | 14.9 | 26.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.7% | -2.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.9% | 4.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.5% | 17.1% |
Risk
BOKF is the more resilient| Metric | BANF | BOKF |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.55 | 0.63 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.76 | 0.8 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.04 | 1.08 |
| Max drawdown | -24.3% | -10.7% |
| Current drawdown | -17.3% | -6.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 25.9% | 22.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -2.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BANF or BOKF?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BANF is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 53 against BOKF's 51. The edge comes from quality and momentum. BOKF is not without a case — it holds the better value profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is BANF or BOKF the better buy right now?
BANF carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BANF over BOKF?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. BANF leads Quality by 15 points; BOKF leads Value by 14 points; BANF leads Momentum by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BANF or BOKF?
Analyst price targets imply +10.7% upside for BANF and +8.5% for BOKF, so the Street currently favors BANF. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, BANF or BOKF?
BOKF is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BOKF on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, BANF or BOKF?
BOKF on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, BANF or BOKF?
BANF on the Momentum factor, by 12 points. Momentum carries 25% of the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, BANF or BOKF?
BOKF is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BOKF on Risk Resilience, by 5 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is BANF more profitable than BOKF?
BANF leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 90.5% vs 66.1%; operating margin 41.1% vs 23.4%; ttm roe 13.4% vs 10.8%.
Is BANF's lead over BOKF getting stronger or weaker?
BANF lead: Reversed — BOKF led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BANF now leads by 2. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-04, when BANF moved ahead of BOKF.
What would change the BANF vs BOKF verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BOKF closes the Quality gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to BANF's edge; BOKF's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; BANF's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about BANF and BOKF?
BANF: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. BOKF: 2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on BANF is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On BOKF it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BANF and BOKF with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.