Carvana vs Group 1 Automotive
CVNA and GPI 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 CVNA and GPI compare
Carvana is the larger company, worth 24 times as much as Group 1 Automotive ($75.2B against $3.1B).
Carvana grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (54.0% versus −3.4% for Group 1 Automotive).
Carvana keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.3% compared with 1.7% at Group 1 Automotive.
Group 1 Automotive pays a dividend yielding 0.82%; Carvana does not pay one.
Carvana scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 10 for Group 1 Automotive), 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 | CVNA | GPI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $75.2B | $3.1B |
| Share price | $68.29 | $260.80 |
| Change, 1 year | −3.5% | −35.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 14.6% | 32.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 3.63 | 0.75 |
| Employees | 23K | 20K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 8.3× |
| P/S | 3.0× | 0.1× (better) |
| P/B | 18.7× | 1.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 35.2× | 7.8× (better) |
| P/FCF | 80.9× | 13.7× (better) |
| FCF yield | 1.2% | 7.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $11.46 | $286.98 |
| Margin of safety | −496% | 9.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 54.0% (better) | −3.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 29.5% (better) | 16.3% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 179% (better) | 0.96% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 10.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 10.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 19.4% (better) | 15.9% |
| Operating margin | 8.9% (better) | 3.6% |
| Net margin | 6.3% (better) | 1.7% |
| FCF margin | 3.7% (better) | 1.0% |
| Return on equity | 54.5% (better) | 12.4% |
| Return on invested capital | 29.3% (better) | 9.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.28 | 1.27 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.14 (better) | 3.82 |
| Interest coverage | 5.3× | – |
| Current ratio | 3.93 (better) | 1.32 |
| Altman Z-score | 7.56 (better) | 3.24 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.82% |
| Payout ratio | – | 6.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 5 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 27.2% |
| Buyback yield | – | 12.1% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 13.0% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 67.2% | 100% |
| Held by insiders | 6.3% | 18.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$258M | $187M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 9 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.5% | 14.8% |
Go deeper
- CVNA stock overview
- CVNA income statement
- CVNA valuation and score
- GPI stock overview
- GPI income statement
- GPI valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.