Covenant Logistics vs Universal Logistics
CVLG and ULH side by side, both in trucking and courier services, except air. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CVLG and ULH compare
Covenant Logistics and Universal Logistics are about the same size, with market caps of $828M and $770M.
On earnings, Universal Logistics is cheaper: it trades at 17.3× trailing earnings, against 172× for Covenant Logistics.
Covenant Logistics grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.5% versus −6.8% for Universal Logistics).
Universal Logistics keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.9% compared with 0.42% at Covenant Logistics.
Both pay dividends: Covenant Logistics yields 0.86% and Universal Logistics 1.4%.
Universal Logistics scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 5 for Covenant Logistics), 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 | CVLG | ULH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $828M | $770M |
| Share price | $32.61 | $29.20 |
| Change, 1 year | 65.9% | 89.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 138% | 45.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.93 | 1.12 |
| Employees | – | 11K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 5 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 172× | 17.3× (better) |
| P/S | 0.6× | 0.5× (better) |
| P/B | 2.0× | 1.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.2× | 6.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 10.6× |
| FCF yield | −4.5% | 9.4% (better) |
| Fair value | $22.11 | $39.90 |
| Margin of safety | −47.5% | 26.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.5% (better) | −6.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.8% (better) | 2.3% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −83.2% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −84.0% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 0.27% | 6.6% (better) |
| Net margin | 0.42% | 2.9% (better) |
| FCF margin | −2.9% | 4.7% (better) |
| Return on equity | 1.3% | 8.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 0.37% | 5.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.67 (better) | 1.18 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.85 | 2.76 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 0.2× | 2.0× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.15 | 1.25 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.54 (better) | 2.03 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.86% | 1.4% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 131% | 24.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 32.0% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.86% | 1.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 58.9% | 28.0% |
| Held by insiders | 61.2% | 74.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$15.1M | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 14.2% | 4.5% |
Go deeper
- CVLG stock overview
- CVLG income statement
- CVLG valuation and score
- ULH stock overview
- ULH income statement
- ULH valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.