Nigeria’s tier-one lenders, Zenith Bank Plc and United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc, have once again delivered strong numbers in their half-year 2025 results.
Both banks continue to compete for market share and investor confidence, but their strategies and financial outcomes show interesting differences.
Market performance
UBA’s share price has been on an impressive run. From N8.29 at the beginning of 2023, it has surged to N44.20, reflecting a CAGR of 86%.
In 2024, the stock gained 33% year-to-date (YtD), and so far in 2025 it is up another 26.5%.
Zenith Bank, meanwhile, has also made gains though at a slower pace. Its shares have risen from N23.93 in early 2023 to N64, representing a CAGR of 44%. The stock advanced 18% YtD in 2024 and has already returned 44% in 2025, reflecting stronger recent momentum.
The takeaway: UBA’s stock has been the longer-term outperformer, but Zenith has stolen the spotlight in 2025.
Zenith Bank closed H1 2025 with a pre-tax profit of N625.6 billion, a 13.9% decline year-on-year, due to impairment charges and decline in net trading gains.
UBA, on the other hand, reported N388.4 billion in pre-tax profit, only 3.3% lower than H1 2024, showing resilience even as trading and revaluation gains slumped.
Over the last five years, UBA has grown faster on the bottom line, delivering N1.73 trillion PAT at a CAGR of 47.7%, compared to Zenith’s N2.41 trillion PAT at a CAGR of 35%.
Yet, Zenith’s profit base remains larger.
The engine room: Interest income and costs
Both lenders benefited from the high-yield environment:
But costs rose in tandem. Interest expenses climbed for both, around N485 billion each, largely driven by customer deposits.
This left Zenith with a hefty N1.36 trillion net interest income, almost double that of H1 2024, while UBA posted N773.0 billion, a steadier 15% growth.
Verdict: Zenith outperformed UBA in the core lending engine room, thanks to stronger loan and treasury bill yields, leaving it with a much bigger net interest income cushion.
Verdict: Zenith outperformed UBA in the core lending engine room, thanks to stronger loan and treasury bill yields, leaving it with a much bigger net interest income cushion.
The major divergence came from credit risk provisioning.
Zenith was hit hard, with impairment charges surging to about N760.8 billion in H1 2025, almost double the prior year, as expected credit losses on financial instruments spiked. This wiped out a hefty portion of its net interest gains.
UBA, by contrast, recorded a much lighter impairment charge of just N35.2 billion, down sharply from N58.6 billion in H1 2024.
Verdict: After provisions, UBA pulled ahead posting net interest income after impairments of about N738 billion, well above Zenith’s N594 billion.
Non-interest income: Fees and trading
The picture was equally mixed outside the lending book.
Verdict: UBA takes the clear lead in fee-based income, leveraging its digital and transaction platforms to outpace Zenith.
Trading and FX:
Verdict: UBA got caught on the wrong side of FX swings, while Zenith leaned on its trading strength to stay ahead
Balance sheet: Scale and deployment
Both banks continue to strengthen their balance sheets:
UBA runs a larger balance sheet but deploys deposits more conservatively, while Zenith channels a higher proportion into lending.
Dividends:
When it comes to valuation, the two banks tell very different stories.
UBA is trading like a hidden bargain.
Zenith Bank, on the other hand, is not as cheap.
Zenith’s higher P/E (2.42x vs. UBA’s 1.97x) means investors are willing to pay more for each naira of Zenith’s earnings, reflecting confidence in its consistency and dividend strength.
UBA’s lower P/E shows the market has not fully priced in its growth potential, leaving it positioned as the value play.
Overall, Zenith Bank and UBA both showed their strengths in H1 2025, but in different ways. Zenith leaned on its stronger lending yields and trading book to power income, though impairment charges weighed heavily.
UBA, meanwhile, kept provisions in check, grew fee income, and maintained profitability despite weaker FX gains.
For investors, the real story lies in valuation. Both banks are trading below book value, meaning the market has not fully priced in their asset strength