Asbury Automotive vs AutoZone
ABG and AZO side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ABG and AZO compare
AutoZone is the larger company, worth 15 times as much as Asbury Automotive ($51.7B against $3.6B).
On earnings, Asbury Automotive is cheaper: it trades at 7.9× trailing earnings, against 21.8× for AutoZone.
AutoZone grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.7% versus −1.3% for Asbury Automotive).
AutoZone keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.4% compared with 2.7% at Asbury Automotive.
Asbury Automotive scores higher on the StockData Score (9 against 6 for AutoZone), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | ABG | AZO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.6B | $51.7B |
| Share price | $198.03 | $3169.82 |
| Change, 1 year | −16.6% | −14.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 8.8% | 74.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.94 | 0.55 |
| Employees | 15K | 15K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 (better) | 6 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 7.9× (better) | 21.8× |
| P/S | 0.2× (better) | 2.6× |
| P/B | 0.9× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.2× (better) | 14.2× |
| P/FCF | – | 31.7× |
| PEG | – | 2.97 |
| FCF yield | – | 3.2% |
| Fair value | $252.95 | $2520.40 |
| Margin of safety | 21.7% (better) | −25.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −1.3% | 5.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 20.3% (better) | 8.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −16.6% | −3.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −12.3% | −1.7% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.8% | 15.0% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 17.1% | 51.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | 4.2% | 18.0% (better) |
| Net margin | 2.7% | 12.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | 8.2% |
| Return on equity | 11.8% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 7.6% | 53.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.84 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.91 | 2.06 (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.91 (better) | 0.89 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.49 | 2.52 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 6.8% (better) | 3.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.8% (better) | 3.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 107% | 95.5% |
| Held by insiders | 18.2% | 0.28% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $1.7M (better) | −$37.2M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.2% | 3.3% |
Go deeper
- ABG stock overview
- ABG income statement
- ABG valuation and score
- AZO stock overview
- AZO income statement
- AZO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.