Enova International vs World Acceptance
ENVA and WRLD side by side, both in personal credit institutions. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ENVA and WRLD compare
Enova International is the larger company, worth 5.7 times as much as World Acceptance ($4.3B against $767M).
On earnings, Enova International is cheaper: it trades at 12.9× trailing earnings, against 19.8× for World Acceptance.
Enova International grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (17.7% versus 4.3% for World Acceptance).
Enova International keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.3% compared with 6.6% at World Acceptance.
Enova International scores higher on the StockData Score (9 against 2 for World Acceptance), 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 | ENVA | WRLD |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.3B | $767M |
| Share price | $174.09 | $164.47 |
| Change, 1 year | 43.4% | 24.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 330% | −32.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.39 | 1.48 |
| Employees | 1,836 | 3,744 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 12.9× (better) | 19.8× |
| P/S | 1.3× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | 2.9× | 2.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 4.9× | – |
| P/FCF | 2.2× (better) | 2.9× |
| PEG | 0.56 (better) | 0.82 |
| FCF yield | 45.1% (better) | 34.1% |
| Fair value | $216.23 | $194.23 |
| Margin of safety | 19.5% (better) | 15.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 17.7% (better) | 4.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 23.8% (better) | 2.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 38.7% (better) | −51.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 43.1% (better) | −43.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −0.31% (better) | −12.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 59.8% | – |
| Operating margin | 24.0% | – |
| Net margin | 10.3% (better) | 6.6% |
| FCF margin | 56.7% (better) | 44.2% |
| Return on equity | 26.1% (better) | 9.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 50.0% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Interest coverage | 2.3× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 1.74 (better) | 1.29 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 3.1% | 15.9% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 3.1% | 15.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 94.7% | 96.1% |
| Held by insiders | 5.5% | 54.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$59.9M | −$29.2M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.0% | 18.7% |
Go deeper
- ENVA stock overview
- ENVA income statement
- ENVA valuation and score
- WRLD stock overview
- WRLD income statement
- WRLD valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.