Camping World vs Rush Enterprises
CWH and RUSHA 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 CWH and RUSHA compare
Rush Enterprises grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−2.6% versus −5.5% for Camping World).
Rush Enterprises keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.7% compared with −4.2% at Camping World.
Camping World pays a dividend yielding 2.9%; Rush Enterprises does not pay one.
Rush Enterprises scores higher on the StockData Score (8 against 5 for Camping World), 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 | CWH | RUSHA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $448M | – |
| Share price | $4.34 | $45.04 |
| Change, 1 year | −62.4% | 35.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −89.8% | 81.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.59 | 0.79 |
| Employees | 362 | 7,355 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 5 | 8 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | 0.1× | – |
| P/B | 8.8× | – |
| Fair value | $11.97 | – |
| Margin of safety | 63.8% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −5.5% | −2.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.2% | 9.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 0.87% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 19.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 28.4% (better) | 19.3% |
| Operating margin | −3.5% | 5.1% (better) |
| Net margin | −4.2% | 3.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | 0.80% |
| Return on equity | −146% | 12.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −12.0% | 12.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 28.02 | 0.11 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 0.08 |
| Interest coverage | – | 12.2× |
| Current ratio | 1.24 | 1.44 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.34 | – |
| Piotroski F-score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.9% | – |
| Payout ratio | – | 22.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 22.0% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.9% | – |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 62.2% | 138% |
| Held by insiders | 42.6% | 13.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$12.0M |
| Short interest, % of float | 18.3% | – |
Go deeper
- CWH stock overview
- CWH income statement
- CWH valuation and score
- RUSHA stock overview
- RUSHA income statement
- RUSHA valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.