Ezcorp vs FirstCash
EZPW and FCFS side by side, both in miscellaneous retail. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How EZPW and FCFS compare
FirstCash is the larger company, worth 4.6 times as much as Ezcorp ($7.9B against $1.7B).
On earnings, Ezcorp is cheaper: it trades at 14.3× trailing earnings, against 20.7× for FirstCash.
Ezcorp grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (28.6% versus 21.6% for FirstCash).
Ezcorp keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.0% compared with 9.4% at FirstCash.
FirstCash pays a dividend yielding 0.93%; Ezcorp does not pay one.
FirstCash scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 16 for Ezcorp), 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 | EZPW | FCFS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.7B | $7.9B |
| Share price | $28.11 | $181.25 |
| Change, 1 year | 61.3% | 22.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 260% | 110% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.61 | 0.46 |
| Employees | 8,500 | 22K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 | 20 (better) |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 14.3× (better) | 20.7× |
| P/S | 1.1× (better) | 1.9× |
| P/B | 1.5× (better) | 3.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.6× | – |
| P/FCF | 12.5× | – |
| PEG | 0.54 (better) | 1.81 |
| FCF yield | 8.0% | – |
| Fair value | $32.63 | $161.93 |
| Margin of safety | 13.9% (better) | −11.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 28.6% (better) | 21.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.1% | 17.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 61.4% (better) | 33.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 56.8% (better) | 34.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 23.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 58.6% (better) | 50.5% |
| Operating margin | 13.9% | – |
| Net margin | 10.0% (better) | 9.4% |
| FCF margin | 8.7% | – |
| Return on equity | 14.7% | 17.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 13.7% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.45 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.81 | – |
| Interest coverage | 6.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 4.81 | 4.89 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.07 (better) | 3.06 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.93% |
| Payout ratio | – | 19.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 10 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 8.2% |
| Buyback yield | 0.52% | 2.2% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 0.52% | 3.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 115% | 98.5% |
| Held by insiders | 5.2% | 26.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.7M (better) | −$20.6M |
| Short interest, % of float | 21.2% | 7.6% |
Go deeper
- EZPW stock overview
- EZPW income statement
- EZPW valuation and score
- FCFS stock overview
- FCFS income statement
- FCFS valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.