Hertz Global vs Ryder System
HTZ and R side by side, both in consumer discretionary. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HTZ and R compare
Ryder System is the larger company, worth 16 times as much as Hertz Global ($10.8B against $684M).
Hertz Global grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.4% versus 1.1% for Ryder System).
Ryder System keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.9% compared with −3.1% at Hertz Global.
Ryder System pays a dividend yielding 1.3%; Hertz Global does not pay one.
Ryder System scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 9 for Hertz Global), 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 | HTZ | R |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $684M | $10.8B |
| Share price | $1.92 | $282.55 |
| Change, 1 year | −63.6% | 65.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −94.4% | 224% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.25 | 0.88 |
| Employees | 26K | 52K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 10 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 23.0× |
| P/S | 0.1× (better) | 0.8× |
| P/B | – | 3.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 5.5× |
| P/FCF | – | 15.8× |
| FCF yield | – | 6.3% |
| Fair value | $37.38 | $156.13 |
| Margin of safety | 94.9% (better) | −81.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.4% (better) | 1.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 10.1% (better) | 8.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −2.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 4.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | −3.1% | 3.9% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | 5.4% |
| Return on equity | – | 16.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 2.59 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.19 |
| Current ratio | – | 0.65 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.18 | 1.40 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.3% |
| Payout ratio | – | 29.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 9.0% |
| Buyback yield | – | 5.6% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 6.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 117% | 91.0% |
| Held by insiders | 53.8% | 4.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$248K (better) | −$41.2M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 2.4% |
Go deeper
- HTZ stock overview
- HTZ income statement
- HTZ valuation and score
- R stock overview
- R income statement
- R valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.