FFIC Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Evans Bancorp has a net margin of 17.11% compared to Flushing Financial's net margin of 16.32%. Flushing Financial's return on equity of 3.89% beat Evans Bancorp's return on equity of 10.61%.

Flushing Financial has a consensus price target of $17.38, signalling upside risk potential of 21.84%. On the other hand Evans Bancorp has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 13.57%. Given that Flushing Financial has higher upside potential than Evans Bancorp, analysts believe Flushing Financial is more attractive than Evans Bancorp.

Flushing Financial has a beta of 0.783, which suggesting that the stock is 21.723% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Evans Bancorp has a beta of 0.922, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 7.751%.

Flushing Financial has a quarterly dividend of $0.22 per share corresponding to a yield of 6.17%. Evans Bancorp offers a yield of 3% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.66 per share. Flushing Financial pays 91.61% of its earnings as a dividend. Evans Bancorp pays out 29.45% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Flushing Financial quarterly revenues are $52.1M, which are larger than Evans Bancorp quarterly revenues of $18M. Flushing Financial's net income of $8.9M is higher than Evans Bancorp's net income of $2.9M. Notably, Flushing Financial's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.39x while Evans Bancorp's PE ratio is 13.23x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Flushing Financial is 2.14x versus 2.91x for Evans Bancorp. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Provident Financial Services has a net margin of 17.11% compared to Flushing Financial's net margin of 22.04%. Flushing Financial's return on equity of 3.89% beat Provident Financial Services's return on equity of 4.63%.

Flushing Financial has a consensus price target of $17.38, signalling upside risk potential of 21.84%. On the other hand Provident Financial Services has an analysts' consensus of $17.20 which suggests that it could grow by 24.17%. Given that Provident Financial Services has higher upside potential than Flushing Financial, analysts believe Provident Financial Services is more attractive than Flushing Financial.

Flushing Financial has a beta of 0.783, which suggesting that the stock is 21.723% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Provident Financial Services has a beta of 1.066, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 6.555%.

Flushing Financial has a quarterly dividend of $0.22 per share corresponding to a yield of 6.17%. Provident Financial Services offers a yield of 5.04% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.24 per share. Flushing Financial pays 91.61% of its earnings as a dividend. Provident Financial Services pays out 56.42% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Flushing Financial quarterly revenues are $52.1M, which are smaller than Provident Financial Services quarterly revenues of $210.6M. Flushing Financial's net income of $8.9M is lower than Provident Financial Services's net income of $46.4M. Notably, Flushing Financial's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.39x while Provident Financial Services's PE ratio is 18.33x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Flushing Financial is 2.14x versus 3.03x for Provident Financial Services. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Park National has a net margin of 17.11% compared to Flushing Financial's net margin of 27.77%. Flushing Financial's return on equity of 3.89% beat Park National's return on equity of 11.8%.

Flushing Financial has a consensus price target of $17.38, signalling upside risk potential of 21.84%. On the other hand Park National has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 4.28%. Given that Flushing Financial has higher upside potential than Park National, analysts believe Flushing Financial is more attractive than Park National.

Flushing Financial has a beta of 0.783, which suggesting that the stock is 21.723% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Park National has a beta of 0.718, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 28.154%.

Flushing Financial has a quarterly dividend of $0.22 per share corresponding to a yield of 6.17%. Park National offers a yield of 2.44% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $1.56 per share. Flushing Financial pays 91.61% of its earnings as a dividend. Park National pays out 54.41% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Flushing Financial quarterly revenues are $52.1M, which are smaller than Park National quarterly revenues of $137.6M. Flushing Financial's net income of $8.9M is lower than Park National's net income of $38.2M. Notably, Flushing Financial's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.39x while Park National's PE ratio is 20.54x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Flushing Financial is 2.14x versus 5.67x for Park National. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Synovus Financial has a net margin of 17.11% compared to Flushing Financial's net margin of 32.65%. Flushing Financial's return on equity of 3.89% beat Synovus Financial's return on equity of 7.19%.

Flushing Financial has a consensus price target of $17.38, signalling upside risk potential of 21.84%. On the other hand Synovus Financial has an analysts' consensus of $40.94 which suggests that it could grow by 20.22%. Given that Flushing Financial has higher upside potential than Synovus Financial, analysts believe Flushing Financial is more attractive than Synovus Financial.

Flushing Financial has a beta of 0.783, which suggesting that the stock is 21.723% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Synovus Financial has a beta of 1.374, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 37.417%.

Flushing Financial has a quarterly dividend of $0.22 per share corresponding to a yield of 6.17%. Synovus Financial offers a yield of 3.02% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.38 per share. Flushing Financial pays 91.61% of its earnings as a dividend. Synovus Financial pays out 46.35% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Flushing Financial quarterly revenues are $52.1M, which are smaller than Synovus Financial quarterly revenues of $556M. Flushing Financial's net income of $8.9M is lower than Synovus Financial's net income of $181.6M. Notably, Flushing Financial's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.39x while Synovus Financial's PE ratio is 22.78x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Flushing Financial is 2.14x versus 3.88x for Synovus Financial. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.