Ezcorp vs Savers Value Village
EZPW and SVV 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 SVV compare
Ezcorp is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Savers Value Village ($1.7B against $1.4B).
On earnings, Ezcorp is cheaper: it trades at 14.3× trailing earnings, against 58.2× for Savers Value Village.
Ezcorp grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (28.6% versus 10.0% for Savers Value Village).
Ezcorp keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.0% compared with 1.4% at Savers Value Village.
Ezcorp scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 5 for Savers Value Village), 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 | SVV |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.7B | $1.4B |
| Share price | $28.11 | $9.31 |
| Change, 1 year | 61.3% | −29.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 260% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.61 | 0.86 |
| Employees | 8,500 | 24K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 5 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 14.3× (better) | 58.2× |
| P/S | 1.1× | 0.8× (better) |
| P/B | 1.5× (better) | 3.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.6× (better) | 9.2× |
| P/FCF | 12.5× (better) | 17.5× |
| PEG | 0.54 | – |
| FCF yield | 8.0% (better) | 5.7% |
| Fair value | $32.63 | $8.47 |
| Margin of safety | 13.9% (better) | −9.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 28.6% (better) | 10.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.1% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 61.4% (better) | −27.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 56.8% (better) | −23.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 58.6% (better) | 55.7% |
| Operating margin | 13.9% (better) | 7.7% |
| Net margin | 10.0% (better) | 1.4% |
| FCF margin | 8.7% (better) | 4.7% |
| Return on equity | 14.7% (better) | 5.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 13.7% (better) | 7.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.45 (better) | 1.61 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.81 (better) | 2.79 |
| Interest coverage | 6.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 4.81 (better) | 0.84 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.07 (better) | 1.37 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 0.52% | 2.1% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 0.52% | 2.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 115% | 107% |
| Held by insiders | 5.2% | 76.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.7M (better) | −$480M |
| Short interest, % of float | 21.2% | 29.3% |
Go deeper
- EZPW stock overview
- EZPW income statement
- EZPW valuation and score
- SVV stock overview
- SVV income statement
- SVV valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.