FFIN vs FIBK Stock Comparison
FFIN currently leads FIBK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 52 vs 45. The clearest difference is quality, while FIBK has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between FFIN and FIBK?
FFIN leads the current stock comparison as First Financial Bankshares, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
First Financial Bankshares, Inc. vs First Interstate BancSystem, Inc.
FFIN leads
FFIN leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support FFIN, and its current signal state is conflicted.
First Financial Bankshares, Inc.
First Interstate BancSystem, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors FFIN over FIBK, 52 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. FFIN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while FIBK holds the stronger momentum profile. FFIN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor FFIN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. FFIN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare First Financial Bankshares, Inc. and First Interstate BancSystem, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare FFIN and FIBK 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.
- Quality75 vs 37FFIN +38
- Risk Resilience78 vs 62FFIN +16
- Momentum27 vs 40FIBK +13
- Value37 vs 48FIBK +11
3 of 6 evidence groups favor FFIN. FFIN’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; FIBK keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +13
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
FFIN's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FFIN and FIBK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
FFIN (First Financial Bankshares, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
FIBK (First Interstate BancSystem, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, value, fundamentals.
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
FFINFFIN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
FFINFFIN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
FIBKFIBK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
FIBKFIBK on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
FFINFFIN on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
FFINFFIN 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 | FFIN | FIBK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16.9% | +0.2% | FFIN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +5.7% | +16.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 4 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | FFIN | FIBK |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 8.02% | 6.07% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.510 | $1.400 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.750 | $1.880 |
| Years increased | 5 | 3 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #145 | #209 |
FFIN grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 8.02% a year against FIBK's 6.07%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor FFIN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | FFIN | 52 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | FIBKon balance | revenue growth 1.3% vs -74.6%; EPS growth 4% vs 42.6%; TTM ROE 15.1% vs 9.6%; gross margin 76.3% vs 105.2%; operating margin 40.5% vs 43.8% — FIBK takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | FIBK | Value 37 vs 48 |
| Technicals | FIBK | Price vs 50-day -9.1% vs -2.7%; vs 200-day -7.2% vs -1.9% |
| Risk Resilience | FFIN | Risk Resilience 78 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | FFIN | Target upside 16.9% vs 0.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FFIN and FIBK 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 moderate at 7 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 FFIN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20FFIN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- FFIN +7
- 52 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- FFIN +8
- 49 vs 41
- 30 sessions ago
- FFIN +5
- 49 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- FFIN +4
- 56 vs 52
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only FFIN
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only FIBK
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active.
FFIN 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.39%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.31%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1FIBK closes the Quality gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to FFIN's edge.
- 2FIBK's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3FFIN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, 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
FIBK leads on balance| Metric | FFIN | FIBK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.3% | -74.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 4% | 42.6% |
| Gross margin | 76.3% | 105.2% |
| Operating margin | 40.5% | 43.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 15.1% | 9.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.04 | 0.23 |
Performance
FIBK leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | FFIN | FIBK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2% | 2.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6.6% | -2.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -12.9% | -7.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -6.4% | 3.9% |
| Year to date | 1.1% | 2.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -3.7% | 21.3% |
Technicals
FIBK has the stronger structure| Metric | FFIN | FIBK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 33.1 | 47.9 |
| ADX (14) | 43.7 | 27.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.1% | -2.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -7.2% | -1.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.1% | 18.5% |
Risk
FFIN is the more resilient| Metric | FFIN | FIBK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.46 | 0.83 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.24 | 0.66 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.33 | 0.99 |
| Max drawdown | -18% | -17.9% |
| Current drawdown | -17.3% | -11.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 23.5% | 25.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.3% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FFIN or FIBK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, FFIN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 52 against FIBK's 45. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. FIBK is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 FFIN or FIBK the better buy right now?
FFIN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor FFIN over FIBK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. FFIN leads Quality by 38 points; FFIN leads Risk Resilience by 16 points; FIBK leads Momentum by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FFIN or FIBK?
Analyst price targets imply +16.9% upside for FFIN and +0.2% for FIBK, so the Street currently favors FFIN. 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, FFIN or FIBK?
FIBK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. FIBK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, FFIN or FIBK?
FFIN 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, FFIN or FIBK?
FIBK on the Momentum factor, by 13 points. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in 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, FFIN or FIBK?
FFIN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. FFIN on Risk Resilience, by 16 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is FFIN more profitable than FIBK?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 76.3% vs 105.2%; operating margin 40.5% vs 43.8%; ttm roe 15.1% vs 9.6%. FFIN leads on one measure and FIBK on two measures, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is FFIN's lead over FIBK getting stronger or weaker?
FFIN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the FFIN vs FIBK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FIBK closes the Quality gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to FFIN's edge; FIBK's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; FFIN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about FFIN and FIBK?
FFIN: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. FIBK: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 FFIN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On FIBK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare FFIN and FIBK with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. 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.