NU vs MS vs WFC Stock Comparison

Nu Holdings, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo & Company Prices as of Oct 26, 2026 Peers: Industry group
1 more company in this comparison (GS) Create a free account to keep reading and compare up to 10 companies.
NU Nu Holdings Ltd.
$12.59 -7.3% 1M -20.5% 1Y
Market cap
$60.27B
P/E
16.7x
Revenue (TTM)
$19.34B
Div. yield
–
Money Center Banks Financial Services
1 win
MS Morgan Stanley
$183.50 -6.5% 1M +12.0% 1Y
Market cap
$290.26B
P/E
14.6x
Revenue (TTM)
$80.16B
Div. yield
–
Money Center Banks Financial Services
4 wins
WFC Wells Fargo & Company/Mn
$82.65 -0.4% 1M -4.4% 1Y
Market cap
$251.40B
P/E
12.4x
Revenue (TTM)
$87.23B
Div. yield
–
Money Center Banks Financial Services
3 wins

Head to Head

8 decided of 12

Morgan Stanley leads on 4 of the 12 questions below (Morgan Stanley 4, Wells Fargo & Company 3, Nu Holdings 1). Which ones matter depends on what you are buying for; a cheap multiple and slow growth often come together.

QuestionNUMSWFCLeader
Larger companyMarket capitalisation $60.27B $290.26B $251.40B MS
Cheaper on earningsLower P/E, profitable companies only 16.7x 14.6x 12.4x WFC
Cheaper on forward earningsLower price / next fiscal year consensus EPS — 13.4x 10.6x WFC
Faster revenue growthRevenue growth, trailing twelve months +50.5% +16.2% +5.4% NU
More profitableNet margin, trailing twelve months 18.7% — — –
Better return on capitalReturn on invested capital 18.1% — — –
Less leveragedLower net debt / EBITDA -2.0x — — –
Higher dividend yieldTrailing dividend yield 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% –
Better 1-year returnPrice return, last 12 months -20.5% +12.0% -4.4% MS
Better 5-year returnAnnualised price return, 5 years — +12.5%/yr +10.6%/yr MS
Less volatileAnnualised volatility, 1 year 46.2% 28.4% 25.6% WFC
Higher overall scoreMean of the five percentile scores vs peers 42/100 54/100 38/100 MS

Percentile Scorecard

NUMSWFC

Each axis is the mean percentile of its metrics against the company's industry group. 100 is the best in the group, 50 the middle.

Scores by Axis

AxisNUMSWFC
Valuation 10 #327 of 362 36 #231 of 362 62 #138 of 362
Growth 81 #42 of 221 93 #17 of 221 21 #174 of 221
Profitability 35 #131 of 200 – –
Financial Health 72 #57 of 203 – –
Shareholder Returns 11 #305 of 342 33 #228 of 342 32 #234 of 342
Overall 42 54 38
  • NU ranked among 370 companies in Banking
  • MS ranked among 370 companies in Banking
  • WFC ranked among 370 companies in Banking

Price Performance

Price return, split-adjusted, before dividends. Click a name to hide or show it.

Returns

PeriodNUMSWFCSPY
1 month -7.3%-6.5%-0.4% -0.8%
3 months -13.4%-14.5%-5.3% +3.5%
6 months -14.0%-3.5%+2.6% +7.0%
Year to date -24.8%+3.4%-11.3% +12.2%
1 year -20.5%+12.0%-4.4% +13.0%
3 years +57.2%+160.7%+113.2% +86.3%
3 years, per year +16.3%+37.7%+28.7% +23.1%
5 years —+80.1%+65.1% +68.6%
5 years, per year —+12.5%+10.6% +11.0%
10 years —+446.3%+79.1% +258.0%
10 years, per year —+18.5%+6.0% +13.6%

Risk

MeasureNUMSWFCSPY
Volatility, 1Y 46.2%28.4%25.6% 12.7%
Downside volatility, 1Y 51.3%29.8%29.0% 12.7%
Beta vs S&P 500, 1Y 1.471.420.67 1.00
Return / volatility, 1Y -0.440.42-0.17 1.02
Max drawdown, 5Y -72.1%-35.3%-38.7% -25.4%
From 52-week high -32.9%-19.7%-14.3% -1.8%
52-week high $18.76$228.55$96.39 $779.14
52-week low $11.60$154.37$73.42 $631.97

Valuation History

Weekly multiples on trailing twelve-month fundamentals. Negative or extreme readings (a loss year, a collapsed denominator) are left out so the chart stays readable.

MultipleNUMSWFC
P/E now vs peer median 16.9xmedian 12.1x 14.4xmedian 12.1x 12.4xmedian 12.1x
P/S now vs peer median 3.1xmedian 3.4x 3.6xmedian 3.4x 2.9xmedian 3.4x
EV/EBITDA now vs peer median 11.5xmedian 5.0x —median 5.0x —median 5.0x
P/FCF now vs peer median -44.7xmedian 11.0x -16.3xmedian 11.0x 12.7xmedian 11.0x
P/B now vs peer median 4.6xmedian 1.2x —median 1.2x —median 1.2x
PEG now vs peer median 0.03median 1.36 0.46median 1.36 1.10median 1.36

Financial History

Reported figures by fiscal period, placed on the calendar year (or quarter) each period ended in, so companies with different fiscal years line up.

Trailing twelve monthsNUMSWFC
Revenue $19.34B $80.16B $87.23B
Gross profit $7.97B – –
Operating income $4.39B – –
Net income $3.61B – –
Free cash flow -$1.36B – –
EPS (diluted) $0.74 $12.65 $6.62
Cash & equivalents $13.55B – –
Total debt $14.55B – –
Shares (diluted) 4.91B 1.57B 3.07B
Enterprise value $4.25B $290.26B $251.40B

All Metrics

58 metrics · best in bold

Bold marks the best reading: the lowest positive value for multiples, leverage and payout, the highest for everything else. The bar under each value is its percentile against that company's own peers. Hover a value for its rank and the peer median.

Valuation

12 metrics
MetricNUMSWFC
P/E 16.9x 14.4x 12.4x
P/FCF -44.7x -16.3x 12.7x
P/Operating cash flow -44.0x – –
P/S 3.1x 3.6x 2.9x
P/B 4.6x – –
P/Tangible book 4.9x – –
EV/EBITDA 11.5x – –
EV/EBIT 11.8x – –
EV/Revenue 2.7x 3.6x 2.9x
EV/FCF -38.0x – –
EV/Operating cash flow -37.5x – –
PEG (3Y EPS CAGR) 0.03 0.46 1.10

Growth

14 metrics
MetricNUMSWFC
Revenue growth (1Y) 50.5% 16.2% 5.4%
Revenue CAGR (3Y) 45.8% 14.1% 2.0%
Gross profit growth (1Y) 42.8% – –
Gross profit CAGR (3Y) 48.4% – –
Operating income growth (1Y) 38.6% – –
Operating income CAGR (3Y) 132.2% – –
Net income growth (1Y) 56.9% – –
Net income CAGR (3Y) 260.8% – –
EPS growth (1Y) 56.2% 29.2% 6.8%
EPS CAGR (3Y) 603.5% 30.9% 11.2%
Operating cash flow growth (1Y) -135.1% – –
Operating cash flow CAGR (3Y) -39.0% – –
Free cash flow growth (1Y) -134.5% – –
Free cash flow CAGR (3Y) -38.6% – –

Profitability

14 metrics
MetricNUMSWFC
Gross margin 41.2% – –
EBITDA margin 23.4% – –
Operating margin 22.7% – –
Pretax margin 22.7% – –
Net margin 18.7% – –
FCF margin -7.0% – –
Operating cash flow margin -7.1% – –
Return on equity 24.5% – –
Return on assets 4.0% 1.2% –
Return on invested capital 18.1% – –
Return on capital employed – – –
Asset turnover 0.2x 0.0x 0.0x
Cash conversion (OCF / net income) -0.4x – –
Stock comp / revenue 1.8% – –

Financial Health

11 metrics
MetricNUMSWFC
Debt / assets 5.7% – –
Debt / equity 0.4x – –
Net debt / EBITDA -2.0x – –
Debt / FCF -3.4x – –
Liabilities / assets 84.0% – 92.1%
Equity / assets 16.0% – –
Interest coverage 1.2x – –
Current ratio – – –
Quick ratio – – –
Cash ratio – – –
Altman Z-score – – –

Shareholder Returns

7 metrics
MetricNUMSWFC
Dividend yield – 2.3% 2.2%
Net buyback yield 0.0% – –
Shareholder yield 0.0% 2.3% 2.2%
Payout ratio (earnings) – – –
Payout ratio (FCF) – – –
Dividend growth (1Y) – – –
Dividend CAGR (3Y) – – –

Analyst Estimates

Solid lines are reported fiscal-year results; dashed lines are the consensus for the years ahead. Hover a year for the analysts' high and low, and how each result compared with its estimate.

ConsensusNUMSWFC
Forward P/E – 13.4xFY2026 10.6xFY2026
EPS, next fiscal year $-2.06FY2023 $13.66FY2026 $7.82FY2026
EPS growth, next FY – +33.8%FY2026 +24.9%FY2026
EPS growth, the year after – -4.2% +7.3%
Revenue, next fiscal year $42.10BFY2029 $80.05BFY2026 $94.32BFY2026
Revenue growth, next FY +3,295.3%FY2029 +13.3%FY2026 +12.7%FY2026
Revenue growth, the year after – +13.3% +4.3%

Institutional Ownership

13F filings, quarter ended Jun 30, 2026
HoldersNUMSWFC
Held by institutions 59.8% 85.7% 76.8%
Institutions holding 854 2,740 2,875
Change in shares held, QoQ +0.3% +1.5% +1.1%
Institutions buying 442 1,466 1,290
Institutions selling 305 939 1,134
Buyers to sellers 1.45 1.56 1.14

Return Correlation

Daily returns, last 12 months

1.00 means two stocks move in lockstep, 0 that they move independently. Pairs below about 0.5 diversify each other.

NUMSWFC
NU 1.00 0.27 0.29
MS 0.27 1.00 0.53
WFC 0.29 0.53 1.00

Add a Peer

Largest companies in the same industry

Related Comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is bigger, NU, MS and WFC?

Morgan Stanley (MS) is the largest by market capitalisation: Nu Holdings (NU) $60.27B, Morgan Stanley (MS) $290.26B, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) $251.40B.

Which stock is cheaper, NU, MS and WFC?

Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) trades on the lowest price-to-earnings ratio (Nu Holdings (NU) 16.7x, Morgan Stanley (MS) 14.6x, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) 12.4x). On next year's consensus earnings, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) is cheapest (Morgan Stanley (MS) 13.4x, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) 10.6x). A lower multiple can reflect slower expected growth, so read it next to the growth figures.

Which company is growing faster?

Nu Holdings (NU) grew revenue fastest over the trailing twelve months: Nu Holdings (NU) +50.5%, Morgan Stanley (MS) +16.2%, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) +5.4%.

Which stock has performed better?

Over the past year Morgan Stanley (MS) returned the most: Nu Holdings (NU) -20.5%, Morgan Stanley (MS) +12.0%, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) -4.4%. Over five years, Morgan Stanley (MS) compounded fastest (Morgan Stanley (MS) +12.5%/yr, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) +10.6%/yr). Returns are price only, before dividends.

Which stock is riskier?

By one-year price volatility, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) has been the steadiest (Nu Holdings (NU) 46.2%, Morgan Stanley (MS) 28.4%, Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) 25.6%). Volatility measures how widely the price swings, not the risk of the business.

Which is the better stock, NU, MS and WFC?

There is no single answer; it depends on what you are buying for. On the 12 head-to-head measures on this page, Morgan Stanley (MS) leads on 4. Business Quant does not give investment advice; use the comparison as a starting point for your own research.

Data from SEC filings, exchange prices and consensus estimates, via Business Quant. Percentile scores compare each company with its own peer group, so two companies' scores are each relative to different peers unless you rank against the whole market. Price returns exclude dividends. Nothing on this page is investment advice.