Big bank earnings season is underway, and the scorecard is messier than the headlines suggest. Bank stocks came into the week under pressure. The Invesco KBW Bank ETF (NASDAQ: KBWB) was roughly 12% below its mid-August peak while the S&P 500 and Nasdaq were hitting records. Climbing bond yields and worries about funding costs were weighing on the group.
The big bank earnings that followed didn’t always match that gloomy mood. Several banks beat estimates and still sold off. One missed and barely flinched. That gap between perception and fundamentals is where investors should focus.
Here’s how I see the winners and losers. Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS), Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS), and JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) delivered results that strengthen their long-term stories. Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) stands alone as the loser. Its problems are partly self-inflicted and partly structural.
The sell-off of Citigroup (NYSE: C) deserves a closer look too. But a falling stock price doesn’t automatically make a bank a loser.
Big Bank Earnings Winner: Goldman Sachs
Goldman Sachs set the tone on Tuesday. The firm posted diluted EPS of $17.01, well above the $13.65 consensus. Revenue rose 23% from a year earlier to $18.68 billion.
Equities trading was the engine. Equities revenue jumped 72% to $6.44 billion as volatile markets kept clients repositioning. Investment banking also beat, with segment revenue of $3.23 billion against estimates of $2.86 billion.
There were soft spots. Fixed income, currency, and commodities revenue was essentially flat at $3.47 billion. EPS also fell from $20.98 in the second quarter.
Still, Goldman is investing in its next leg of growth. It agreed to buy NEOS Investments and LCN Capital Partners to expand its alternatives platform. It also returned $4.49 billion to common shareholders. Shares moved higher after the report. That reaction looks justified.
Big Bank Earnings Winner: Morgan Stanley
Morgan Stanley may be the week’s most underappreciated winner. EPS of $3.03 beat the LSEG consensus of $2.91. Net revenue rose 12% to $20.34 billion.
Wealth management is the reason to own this stock. The division posted record revenue of $9.1 billion and record pretax profit of $2.8 billion. Net new assets hit a record $232 billion. Total client assets across wealth and investment management climbed by nearly $400 billion to a record $10.5 trillion.
The institutional side held up too. Equities revenue surged 41% year over year. Return on tangible common equity was 22.6%, the fifth straight quarter above 20%.
So why did shares fall more than 3%? Investors focused on softer fixed income and investment banking, plus a carry reversal in investment management. That’s perception overriding fundamentals. One fair caution: just over half of the net new assets were tied to IPOs. Those flows can ebb. But a record asset base generates recurring fees regardless of trading conditions.
Big Bank Earnings Winner: JPMorgan Chase
Calling JPMorgan Chase a winner requires some explanation. The bank posted its first quarterly earnings miss since the fourth quarter of 2023. EPS of $5.57 came in below the $5.85 LSEG consensus.
Context matters. The shortfall partly reflected $658 million in investment securities losses, worth about $0.18 per share after tax. Excluding that, EPS was $5.75, still a miss. But a narrow one.
The core engine is accelerating. Net interest income climbed 13% to $27.1 billion. Full-year 2026 NII guidance rose to about $106.2 billion from $105.5 billion. Management also floated a 2027 NII outlook near $107 billion. Return on tangible common equity of 20% beat the 17% through-cycle target.
The market got this one right. Shares reversed a 3% premarket drop and traded higher after the open. Investors looked past volatile trading lines and paid for durable lending income. The risk to watch is capital return. Net common stock repurchases were just $664 million this quarter.
Big Bank Earnings Loser: Bank of America
Bank of America is the clear loser of big bank earnings season so far. Adjusted EPS of $1.08 missed the $1.10 consensus. Revenue of $29.96 billion fell short of the $30.56 billion estimate.
Headline results looked worse. A $1.2 billion regulatory charge tied to Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering consent orders cut $0.17 from EPS. GAAP EPS dropped to $0.91. Net income fell to $6.9 billion from $8.3 billion a year earlier.
The capital markets business is the deeper problem. FICC revenue fell 17% to $2.6 billion. Investment banking fees declined 11% to $1.8 billion. Rivals rode a trading boom. Bank of America largely missed it.
Investors had fair warning. In September, CEO Brian Moynihan guided to flat trading revenue and lower banking fees. The stock fell about 5% that day. It dropped again on the actual report.
The banking franchise isn’t broken. Net interest income rose 8% to $16.4 billion. Management guided to 2027 NII growth of 8% or more. That’s real, but it isn’t enough to change the narrative right now.
What About Citigroup?
Citigroup is the hardest call, and I don’t think it belongs in the loser column. The stock fell about 5.6% on Tuesday despite an earnings beat. The results didn’t justify that.
Citi earned $2.85 per share against a $2.65 consensus, on its strongest third-quarter revenue in a decade. Revenue rose 8% to $23.85 billion. Management raised the dividend 12% and expects to exceed its 2026 return target.
The selloff likely reflects worries about seasonally weaker second-half trading and rising investment spending. That’s a perception problem, not a fundamentals problem. For contrarian investors, Citi may be the most interesting setup of the week.
How to Position Your Portfolio After Big Bank Earnings
This round of big bank earnings separated diversified franchises from banks leaning on a single engine. Goldman and Morgan Stanley captured the equities boom. JPMorgan proved its lending machine can carry a soft trading quarter.
Bank of America lacked both advantages this quarter. Investors punished it accordingly.
The bigger lesson is about reactions. Morgan Stanley and Citigroup sold off on strong results. When price action and fundamentals diverge this sharply, fundamentals usually win over time.