Maplebear vs Lyft
CART and LYFT side by side, both in miscellaneous business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CART and LYFT compare
Maplebear is the larger company, worth 2.1 times as much as Lyft ($13.1B against $6.1B).
On earnings, Lyft is cheaper: it trades at 2.3× trailing earnings, against 31.0× for Maplebear.
Maplebear grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.6% versus 10.8% for Lyft).
Lyft keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 42.3% compared with 12.0% at Maplebear.
Maplebear scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 11 for Lyft), 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 | CART | LYFT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $13.1B | $6.1B |
| Share price | $56.45 | $16.16 |
| Change, 1 year | 49.4% | −19.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 476% | −69.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.03 | 1.67 |
| Employees | 3,600 | 3,913 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 31.0× | 2.3× (better) |
| P/S | 3.3× | 0.9× (better) |
| P/B | 5.6× | 2.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.4× (better) | 201× |
| P/FCF | 11.1× | – |
| PEG | 1.67 | – |
| FCF yield | 9.0% | – |
| Fair value | $45.31 | – |
| Margin of safety | −24.6% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.6% (better) | 10.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 21.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −1.6% | 3009% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 7.7% | 3082% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 72.6% (better) | 45.5% |
| Operating margin | 14.7% (better) | −1.8% |
| Net margin | 12.0% | 42.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 29.5% | – |
| Return on equity | 17.1% | 153% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 29.3% (better) | −10.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.35 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −28.12 |
| Interest coverage | – | −5.9× |
| Current ratio | 2.28 (better) | 0.59 |
| Altman Z-score | 8.05 (better) | −0.09 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 14.2% (better) | 11.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 14.2% (better) | 11.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 83.6% | 111% |
| Held by insiders | 71.9% | 6.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$27.6M | −$7.2M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 33.7% | 22.3% |
Go deeper
- CART stock overview
- CART income statement
- CART valuation and score
- LYFT stock overview
- LYFT income statement
- LYFT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.