AutoNation vs Rush Enterprises
AN and RUSHA side by side, both in retail-auto dealers & gasoline stations. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AN and RUSHA compare
AutoNation grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−1.8% versus −2.6% for Rush Enterprises).
Rush Enterprises keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.7% compared with 2.6% at AutoNation.
AutoNation scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 8 for Rush Enterprises), 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 | AN | RUSHA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.0B | – |
| Share price | $187.21 | $45.10 |
| Change, 1 year | −3.0% | 35.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 58.9% | 81.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.79 | 0.80 |
| Employees | 25K | 7,355 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 0 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 9.0× | – |
| P/S | 0.2× | – |
| P/B | 2.6× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 5.1× | – |
| P/FCF | 261× | – |
| FCF yield | 0.38% | – |
| Fair value | $239.43 | – |
| Margin of safety | 21.8% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −1.8% (better) | −2.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.3% | 9.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 8.9% (better) | 0.87% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 22.6% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 31.7% (better) | 19.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 17.7% | 19.3% (better) |
| Operating margin | 4.6% | 5.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 2.6% | 3.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | 0.08% | 0.80% (better) |
| Return on equity | 30.2% (better) | 12.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 37.2% (better) | 12.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.24 | 0.11 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.40 | 0.08 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 6.4× | 12.2× (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.77 | 1.44 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.77 | – |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Payout ratio | – | 22.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 22.0% |
| Buyback yield | 16.6% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 16.6% | – |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 75.8% | 138% |
| Held by insiders | 29.1% | 13.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $1.0M (better) | −$12.0M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 12.7% | – |
Go deeper
- AN stock overview
- AN income statement
- AN valuation and score
- RUSHA stock overview
- RUSHA income statement
- RUSHA valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.