Regional Management vs World Acceptance
RM 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 RM and WRLD compare
World Acceptance is the larger company, worth 2.3 times as much as Regional Management ($767M against $335M).
On earnings, Regional Management is cheaper: it trades at 7.6× trailing earnings, against 19.8× for World Acceptance.
Regional Management grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (9.6% versus 4.3% for World Acceptance).
Regional Management keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 7.0% compared with 6.6% at World Acceptance.
Regional Management pays a dividend yielding 3.3%; World Acceptance does not pay one.
Regional Management scores higher on the StockData Score (14 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 | RM | WRLD |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $335M | $767M |
| Share price | $36.30 | $164.47 |
| Change, 1 year | −7.0% | 24.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −39.0% | −32.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.09 | 1.48 |
| Employees | 2,112 | 3,744 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 7.6× (better) | 19.8× |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | 0.9× (better) | 2.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | 4.2× | – |
| P/FCF | 1.0× (better) | 2.9× |
| PEG | – | 0.82 |
| FCF yield | 96.6% (better) | 34.1% |
| Fair value | $48.10 | $194.23 |
| Margin of safety | 24.5% (better) | 15.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 9.6% (better) | 4.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.5% (better) | 2.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 34.8% (better) | −51.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 36.9% (better) | −43.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.1% (better) | −12.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 7.0% (better) | 6.6% |
| FCF margin | 48.2% (better) | 44.2% |
| Return on equity | 12.6% (better) | 9.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 0.71 | 1.29 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.3% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 43.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | 7.5% | 15.9% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 10.8% | 15.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 88.7% | 96.1% |
| Held by insiders | 23.0% | 54.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$18.6M (better) | −$29.2M |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.8% | 18.7% |
Go deeper
- RM stock overview
- RM income statement
- RM 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.