Ezcorp vs Suburban Propane Partners LP
EZPW and SPH 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 SPH compare
Ezcorp is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as Suburban Propane Partners LP ($1.7B against $1.2B).
Ezcorp grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (28.6% versus −2.5% for Suburban Propane Partners LP).
Ezcorp keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.0% compared with 9.4% at Suburban Propane Partners LP.
Suburban Propane Partners LP pays a dividend yielding 7.2%; Ezcorp does not pay one.
Ezcorp scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 11 for Suburban Propane Partners LP), 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 | SPH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.7B | $1.2B |
| Share price | $28.11 | $17.96 |
| Change, 1 year | 61.3% | −1.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 260% | 18.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.61 | 0.35 |
| Employees | 8,500 | 3,190 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 14.3× | – |
| P/S | 1.1× | 0.9× (better) |
| P/B | 1.5× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.6× (better) | 8.6× |
| P/FCF | 12.5× | 11.8× (better) |
| PEG | 0.54 | – |
| FCF yield | 8.0% | 8.5% (better) |
| Fair value | $32.63 | $26.26 |
| Margin of safety | 13.9% | 31.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 28.6% (better) | −2.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.1% (better) | 5.3% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 61.4% (better) | 34.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 56.8% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 10.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 58.6% | 63.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 13.9% | 15.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 10.0% (better) | 9.4% |
| FCF margin | 8.7% (better) | 7.3% |
| Return on equity | 14.7% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 13.7% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.45 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.81 (better) | 4.36 |
| Interest coverage | 6.7× (better) | 2.8× |
| Current ratio | 4.81 (better) | 0.78 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.07 (better) | 1.30 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 7.2% |
| Buyback yield | 0.52% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 0.52% | 7.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 115% | 43.3% |
| Held by insiders | 5.2% | 3.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.7M | −$264K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 21.2% | 0.75% |
Go deeper
- EZPW stock overview
- EZPW income statement
- EZPW valuation and score
- SPH stock overview
- SPH income statement
- SPH valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.