vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of FNB CORP/PA/ (FNB) and HANCOCK WHITNEY CORP (HWC), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
FNB CORP/PA/ is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($366.0M vs $295.0M, roughly 1.2× HANCOCK WHITNEY CORP). FNB CORP/PA/ runs the higher net margin — 45.9% vs 16.1%, a 29.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, FNB CORP/PA/ posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (13.7% vs -19.7%). Over the past eight quarters, FNB CORP/PA/'s revenue compounded faster (7.1% CAGR vs 4.5%).
FNB集团是总部位于美国宾夕法尼亚州匹兹堡的多元化金融服务机构，为旗下最大子公司第一国民银行的控股主体，截至2025年12月31日总资产超500亿美元，业务覆盖匹兹堡、巴尔的摩、克利夫兰、华盛顿特区、北卡罗来纳州多座城市及南卡罗来纳州查尔斯顿等核心都会区。
汉考克惠特尼公司是总部位于美国密西西比州格尔夫波特的银行控股企业，在密西西比、阿拉巴马、佛罗里达、路易斯安那、得克萨斯五州共运营237家网点。它是新奥尔良圣徒队、路易斯安那州立大学体育队、路易斯安那大学拉法叶分校运动队的官方合作银行，独家发行对应队伍的官方借记卡，还独家提供LSU老虎队专属信用卡。
FNB vs HWC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q1 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $366.0M | $295.0M |
| Net Profit | $168.0M | $47.4M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 45.1% | — |
| Net Margin | 45.9% | 16.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 13.7% | -19.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 52.7% | -62.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.47 | $0.57 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q1 26 | — | $295.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $366.0M | $282.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $359.0M | $279.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $348.0M | $277.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $323.0M | $269.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $322.0M | $273.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $323.0M | $271.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $316.0M | $270.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | $47.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | $168.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $150.0M | $127.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $130.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $117.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $110.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $110.0M | $115.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $123.0M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 45.1% | 56.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 52.9% | 57.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 47.7% | 52.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 45.8% | 55.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 31.7% | 55.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 43.3% | 53.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 49.7% | 53.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | 16.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | 45.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 41.8% | 45.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 37.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 36.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 34.1% | 42.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 38.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.57 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.47 | $1.48 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.41 | $1.49 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.36 | $1.32 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.32 | $1.38 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.31 | $1.40 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.30 | $1.33 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.34 | $1.31 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $2.5B | $223.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.9B | $1.6B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $6.8B | — |
| Total Assets | $50.2B | $35.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.28× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q1 26 | — | $223.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.4B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.4B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.4B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.1B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.9B | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | $199.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.1B | $210.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.7B | $210.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.5B | $210.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.0B | $210.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.5B | $236.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0B | $236.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.8B | $4.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.6B | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.5B | $4.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.4B | $4.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.3B | $4.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.2B | $4.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.1B | $3.9B |
| Q1 26 | — | $35.5B | ||
| Q4 25 | $50.2B | $35.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $49.9B | $35.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $49.7B | $35.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $49.0B | $34.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $48.6B | $35.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $48.0B | $35.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $47.7B | $35.4B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.28× | 0.04× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.32× | 0.05× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.41× | 0.05× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.39× | 0.05× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.48× | 0.05× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.40× | 0.06× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.33× | 0.06× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $128.0M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $99.0M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 27.0% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 7.9% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 0.76× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $376.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $128.0M | $153.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $167.0M | $158.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $123.0M | $125.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.0M | $104.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $326.0M | $191.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-14.0M | $162.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $85.0M | $105.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $99.0M | $145.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $149.0M | $155.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $85.0M | $122.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $43.0M | $100.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $278.0M | $188.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-46.0M | $158.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $55.0M | $103.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 27.0% | 51.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 41.5% | 55.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 24.4% | 44.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.3% | 37.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 86.3% | 69.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | -14.2% | 58.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 17.4% | 38.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 7.9% | 2.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.0% | 1.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.9% | 1.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | 1.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.9% | 1.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.9% | 1.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.5% | 0.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.76× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.11× | 1.25× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.95× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.55× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.96× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.13× | 1.41× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.69× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
