Rush Enterprises vs Sonic Automotive
RUSHA and SAH side by side, both in retail-auto dealers & gasoline stations. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How RUSHA and SAH compare
Sonic Automotive grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (2.0% versus −2.6% for Rush Enterprises).
Rush Enterprises keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.7% compared with 1.3% at Sonic Automotive.
Sonic Automotive pays a dividend yielding 2.5%; Rush Enterprises does not pay one.
Sonic Automotive scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 8 for Rush Enterprises), 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 | RUSHA | SAH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $2.0B |
| Share price | $45.10 | $63.23 |
| Change, 1 year | 35.9% | 1.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 81.6% | 35.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.80 | 0.94 |
| Employees | 7,355 | 11K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 10.2× |
| P/S | – | 0.1× |
| P/B | – | 1.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 5.7× |
| P/FCF | – | 21.9× |
| PEG | – | 0.66 |
| FCF yield | – | 4.6% |
| Fair value | – | $85.27 |
| Margin of safety | – | 25.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −2.6% | 2.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.4% (better) | 9.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 0.87% | 58.1% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 69.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 19.2% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 19.3% (better) | 15.7% |
| Operating margin | 5.1% (better) | 3.2% |
| Net margin | 3.7% (better) | 1.3% |
| FCF margin | 0.80% (better) | 0.59% |
| Return on equity | 12.0% | 19.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 12.8% | 19.0% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.11 (better) | 1.65 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.08 (better) | 2.64 |
| Interest coverage | 12.2× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.44 (better) | 0.95 |
| Altman Z-score | – | 3.17 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.5% |
| Payout ratio | 22.2% | −22.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 4 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 22.0% | – |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.78% |
| Shareholder yield | – | 3.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 138% | 46.1% |
| Held by insiders | 13.4% | 74.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$12.0M | $931K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 32.0% |
Go deeper
- RUSHA stock overview
- RUSHA income statement
- RUSHA valuation and score
- SAH stock overview
- SAH income statement
- SAH valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.