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 2.1 times as much as Regional Management ($650M against $316M).
On earnings, Regional Management is cheaper: it trades at 7.1× trailing earnings, against 13.2× for World Acceptance.
Regional Management grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.4% versus 4.5% for World Acceptance).
World Acceptance keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.3% compared with 7.0% at Regional Management.
Regional Management pays a dividend yielding 3.4%; 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 | $316M | $650M |
| Share price | $35.29 | $139.30 |
| Change, 1 year | −8.0% | 4.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −42.6% | −37.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.06 | 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 | 7.1× (better) | 13.2× |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 1.1× |
| P/B | 0.8× (better) | 1.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 3.8× | – |
| P/FCF | 1.0× (better) | 2.3× |
| PEG | – | 0.55 |
| FCF yield | 101% (better) | 42.9% |
| Fair value | $50.04 | $125.71 |
| Margin of safety | 29.5% (better) | −10.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.4% (better) | 4.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.5% (better) | 2.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 14.9% (better) | −12.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 19.6% (better) | 1.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.1% (better) | −12.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 7.0% | 8.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 46.7% | 46.7% (better) |
| Return on equity | 12.6% | 13.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 0.69 | 1.16 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.4% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 43.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | 9.6% | 12.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 13.0% (better) | 12.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 91.5% | 96.1% |
| Held by insiders | 17.9% | 54.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$12.3M (better) | −$44.9M |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.1% | 18.1% |
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.