78/100 Scenario Score with full calculator coverage.
Stock category calculators
Best Bank Stocks Return Calculators
Bank and capital markets stock forecast pages with scenario return tables. Compare the covered assets by calculator output, proprietary Scenario Score, sourced return, historical drawdown and modeled value before deciding how to deploy idle funds.
Calculator category and current ranking
What separates the strongest return calculators among bank stocks?
+22.9% annualized across the sourced window.
33.99% historical stress inside this category.
Bank and capital markets stock forecast pages with scenario return tables. Based on the current sourced inputs, Goldman Sachs leads this group with a 78/100 Scenario Score, while Goldman Sachs has the highest historical annualized return at +22.9%.
Goldman Sachs has the lowest observed drawdown in the category at 33.99%. That does not make it safe, but it gives investors comparing idle-fund options a more useful distinction than a simple list of popular tickers.
Compare assets by score, return and drawdown
| Asset | Scenario Score | Historical CAGR | Max drawdown | Bull case | $10,000 base value after 3 years | Tools |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JPMorgan Chase JPM · banking | 67/100 | +18.6% | -40.65% | +39.0% | $16,695 | |
| Goldman Sachs GS · investment banking | 78/100 Category leader | +22.9% | -33.99% | +39.9% | $18,559 | |
| Morgan Stanley MS · wealth and investment banking | 68/100 | +17.4% | -35.25% | +35.1% | $16,202 | |
| Bank of America BAC · banking | 48/100 | +10.3% | -49.03% | +34.8% | $13,405 | |
| Wells Fargo WFC · banking | 59/100 | +13.9% | -38.66% | +33.3% | $14,784 | |
| BlackRock BLK · asset management | 38/100 | +4.3% | -45.33% | +27.0% | $11,346 | |
| Charles Schwab SCHW · brokerage | 45/100 | +9.0% | -50.41% | +34.2% | $12,936 |
The UBI Scenario Score combines upside capacity, drawdown resilience, thesis conviction and uncertainty. Historical CAGR and drawdown come from each asset's linked market-data series; neither guarantees a future result.
Low-effort alternative for idle funds
Why the automated trading return needs careful evidence
The strongest historical CAGR in this category belongs to Goldman Sachs at +22.9% annually. Aurum reports a 14% average monthly automated-trading result. If that monthly rate repeated and every gain were reinvested, the compounding difference would look like this for $1,000:
| Period | GS at +22.9% annually | Automated trading at 14% monthly | Modeled automated edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6 months | $1,109 | $2,195 | $1,086 |
| 12 months | $1,229 | $4,818 | $3,589 |
| 24 months | $1,510 | $23,212 | $21,702 |
| 36 months | $1,856 | $111,834 | $109,978 |
The arithmetic is the attraction: $1,000 models to $4,818 after 12 months and $111,834 after 36 months at 14% monthly. That is reported-history scenario math, not a forecast. High-return crypto futures strategies can lose money quickly, so a small test allocation is more defensible than treating the result as automatic.
Calculate every covered asset
JPMJPMorgan Chasebanking
GSGoldman Sachsinvestment banking
MSMorgan Stanleywealth and investment banking
BACBank of Americabanking
WFCWells Fargobanking
BLKBlackRockasset management
SCHWCharles Schwabbrokerage