Home Compare BBVA.MC vs SAN.MC
Stock Comparison · Industry comparison · Banks - Diversified

Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria vs Banco Santander: Valuation, Growth and Quality Compared

The structural profiles are close, with Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, carrying a narrow edge on growth. The remaining gap is narrow enough that the comparison remains open to different readings. The market setup is broadly comparable for both — no clear directional signal from price behavior. The market is not adding a decisive signal either way — the structural read carries the weight.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.

Updated 2026-04-05

The comparison stays tight enough that no single part of the profile fully breaks it open.

INDUSTRY COMPARISON

Both operate in: Banks - Diversified

This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. BBVA.MC and SAN.MC share the same industry classification.

For a similarity-based comparison, see how BBVA.MC and Banco Santander, each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.

Peer-Relative Score
BBVA.MC
Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, S.A.
60
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
vs
SAN.MC
Banco Santander, S.A.
57
Peer-Score
Signal qualityLow

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

Score differences across key dimensions.

Dimension spread: BBVA.MC vs SAN.MC Profitability 65 61 Stability 50 45 Valuation 79 78 Growth 37 30 BBVA.MC SAN.MC
Gap Ranking
#1 Growth +7
#2 Stability +5
#3 Profitability +4
#4 Valuation +1
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for BBVA.MC and SAN.MC Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer BBVA.MCSAN.MC Relative valuation Structural strength

The setup stays mixed because structure and the price setup do not align cleanly in one direction.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

What else supports the lead

Longer-term trajectory data broadly supports the current direction of the comparison.

What this means for the comparison

The lead is visible and not limited to a single small edge.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the BBVA.MC vs SAN.MC comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Other close comparisons

Explore how BBVA.MC and SAN.MC each compare against other companies in their peer groups.

Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.

Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.

Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.