Custom Truck One Source vs McGrath RentCorp
CTOS and MGRC side by side, both in miscellaneous equipment rental and leasing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CTOS and MGRC compare
McGrath RentCorp is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as Custom Truck One Source ($3.1B against $2.3B).
On earnings, McGrath RentCorp is cheaper: it trades at 19.8× trailing earnings, against 76.9× for Custom Truck One Source.
Custom Truck One Source grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.8% versus 2.1% for McGrath RentCorp).
McGrath RentCorp keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 16.8% compared with 1.4% at Custom Truck One Source.
McGrath RentCorp pays a dividend yielding 1.5%; Custom Truck One Source does not pay one.
McGrath RentCorp scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 5 for Custom Truck One Source), 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 | CTOS | MGRC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.3B | $3.1B |
| Share price | $10.00 | $128.68 |
| Change, 1 year | 66.9% | 24.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 18.2% | 61.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.37 | 0.57 |
| Employees | 2,500 | 1,306 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 5 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 76.9× | 19.8× (better) |
| P/S | 1.1× (better) | 3.3× |
| P/B | 2.8× | 2.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.8× | 8.8× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 14.9× |
| PEG | – | 1.88 |
| FCF yield | – | 6.7% |
| Fair value | $6.16 | $127.77 |
| Margin of safety | −62.3% | −0.71% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.8% (better) | 2.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 45.1% (better) | 10.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 9.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 9.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 8.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 22.6% | 48.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | 8.2% | 25.7% (better) |
| Net margin | 1.4% | 16.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | 22.1% |
| Return on equity | 3.7% | 12.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.9% | 14.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.01 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.70 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | 8.7× |
| Current ratio | 1.28 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 1.07 | 2.76 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.5% |
| Payout ratio | – | 30.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 2.9% |
| Buyback yield | 0.00% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 1.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 98.3% | 92.8% |
| Held by insiders | 73.8% | 1.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$8.7M |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.9% | 1.9% |
Go deeper
- CTOS stock overview
- CTOS income statement
- CTOS valuation and score
- MGRC stock overview
- MGRC income statement
- MGRC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.