PNFP vs. RF
Compare and contrast key facts about Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc. (PNFP) and Regions Financial Corporation (RF).
Performance
PNFP vs. RF - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
PNFP vs. RF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
PNFP Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc. | -8.97% |
RF Regions Financial Corporation | -4.31% |
Fundamentals
PNFP:
$6.70B
RF:
$22.99B
PNFP:
$8.29
RF:
$2.42
PNFP:
10.39
RF:
10.80
PNFP:
2.28
RF:
2.42
PNFP:
0.98
RF:
1.30
PNFP:
$2.92B
RF:
$9.61B
PNFP:
$1.93B
RF:
$7.17B
PNFP:
$837.81M
RF:
$2.81B
Returns By Period
PNFP
- 1D
- 2.98%
- 1M
- -5.09%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RF
- 1D
- 3.49%
- 1M
- -5.24%
- YTD
- -2.69%
- 6M
- 1.06%
- 1Y
- 25.29%
- 3Y*
- 17.84%
- 5Y*
- 9.03%
- 10Y*
- 17.02%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PNFP vs. RF — Risk / Return Rank
PNFP
RF
PNFP vs. RF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc. (PNFP) and Regions Financial Corporation (RF). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PNFP | RF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 0.85 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.29 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.47 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -1.04 | 0.17 | -1.21 |
Correlation
The correlation between PNFP and RF is 0.78, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
PNFP vs. RF - Dividend Comparison
PNFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than RF's 4.00% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PNFP Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc. | 0.58% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RF Regions Financial Corporation | 4.00% | 5.12% | 4.17% | 4.54% | 3.43% | 2.98% | 3.85% | 3.44% | 3.44% | 1.82% | 1.78% | 2.40% |
Drawdowns
PNFP vs. RF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PNFP drawdown since its inception was -19.71%, smaller than the maximum RF drawdown of -92.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PNFP and RF.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| PNFP | RF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.71% | -92.65% | +72.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -18.45% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -40.99% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -60.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.76% | -14.79% | -0.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.25% | -31.19% | +22.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 7.31% | — |
Volatility
PNFP vs. RF - Volatility Comparison
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| PNFP | RF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 6.68% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 18.83% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.72% | 29.81% | +1.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.72% | 31.63% | +0.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.72% | 36.02% | -4.30% |
Financials
PNFP vs. RF - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc. and Regions Financial Corporation. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
PNFP vs. RF - Profitability Comparison
PNFP - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc. reported a gross profit of 542.20M and revenue of 846.22M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 64.1%.
RF - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Regions Financial Corporation reported a gross profit of 1.92B and revenue of 2.41B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 79.8%.
PNFP - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc. reported an operating income of 205.45M and revenue of 846.22M, resulting in an operating margin of 24.3%.
RF - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Regions Financial Corporation reported an operating income of 708.00M and revenue of 2.41B, resulting in an operating margin of 29.4%.
PNFP - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc. reported a net income of 169.78M and revenue of 846.22M, resulting in a net margin of 20.1%.
RF - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Regions Financial Corporation reported a net income of 534.00M and revenue of 2.41B, resulting in a net margin of 22.2%.