Enova International vs Regional Management
ENVA and RM side by side, both in personal credit institutions. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ENVA and RM compare
Enova International is the larger company, worth 13 times as much as Regional Management ($4.1B against $311M).
On earnings, Regional Management is cheaper: it trades at 7.0× trailing earnings, against 11.5× for Enova International.
Enova International grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (20.1% versus 8.4% for Regional Management).
Enova International keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.5% compared with 7.0% at Regional Management.
Regional Management pays a dividend yielding 3.5%; Enova International does not pay one.
Regional Management scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 10 for Enova International), 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 | ENVA | RM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.1B | $311M |
| Share price | $167.01 | $34.74 |
| Change, 1 year | 31.2% | −8.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 322% | −43.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.37 | 1.05 |
| Employees | 1,836 | 2,112 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 11.5× | 7.0× (better) |
| P/S | 1.1× | 0.5× (better) |
| P/B | 2.6× | 0.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 4.3× | 3.8× (better) |
| P/FCF | 2.0× | 1.0× (better) |
| PEG | 0.50 | – |
| FCF yield | 49.1% | 103% (better) |
| Fair value | $223.65 | $46.60 |
| Margin of safety | 25.3% | 25.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 20.1% (better) | 8.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 23.8% (better) | 11.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 30.5% (better) | 14.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 33.4% (better) | 19.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −0.31% | 13.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 60.6% | – |
| Operating margin | 24.0% | – |
| Net margin | 10.5% (better) | 7.0% |
| FCF margin | 54.9% (better) | 46.7% |
| Return on equity | 26.8% (better) | 12.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 50.4% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | 2.3× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 1.67 (better) | 0.69 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 3.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 43.1% |
| Buyback yield | 3.5% | 9.7% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 3.5% | 13.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.4% | 91.5% |
| Held by insiders | 5.4% | 17.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$72.4M | −$12.3M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.3% | 5.1% |
Go deeper
- ENVA stock overview
- ENVA income statement
- ENVA valuation and score
- RM stock overview
- RM income statement
- RM valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.