RUSHA vs LAD vs ABG

For growth investors, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc.

(ABG) is the stronger pick with 4. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 7% for Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA). Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. (ABG) offers the better valuation at 8. 0x trailing P/E (7. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lithia Motors, Inc. (LAD) a "Buy" — based on 26 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc.

(ABG) is the cheapest at 8. 0x versus Rush Enterprises, Inc. at 21. 8x. On forward P/E, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. wins at 0. 56x versus Rush Enterprises, Inc. 's 1. 86x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Rush Enterprises, Inc.

(RUSHA) delivered a total return of +125. 2%, compared to -21. 0% for Lithia Motors, Inc. (LAD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RUSHA returned +812. 3% versus ABG's +251. 6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Rush Enterprises, Inc.

(RUSHA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 98β versus Lithia Motors, Inc. 's 1. 09β — meaning LAD is approximately 11% more volatile than RUSHA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 70% versus 2% for Lithia Motors, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Asbury Automotive Group, Inc.

(ABG) is pulling ahead at 4. 7% versus -4. 7% for Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. grew EPS 16. 9% year-over-year, compared to -12. 1% for Rush Enterprises, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LAD leads at 10. 1% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Rush Enterprises, Inc.

(RUSHA) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 5% net margin versus 2. 2% for Lithia Motors, Inc. — meaning it keeps 3. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABG leads at 5. 6% versus 3. 8% for LAD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RUSHA leads at 18. 7%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. (ABG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 56x versus Rush Enterprises, Inc. 's 1. 86x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. (ABG) trades at 7. 7x forward P/E versus 19. 2x for Rush Enterprises, Inc. — 11. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LAD: 41. 4% to $411. 67.

In this comparison, RUSHA (1.

0% yield), LAD (0. 7% yield) pay a dividend. ABG does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Rush Enterprises, Inc.

(RUSHA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 98), 1. 0% yield, +812. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (RUSHA: +812. 3%, ABG: +251. 6%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: RUSHA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LAD is a small-cap deep-value stock; ABG is a small-cap deep-value stock. RUSHA, LAD pay a dividend while ABG does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.