CRGO vs CHRW

For growth investors, Freightos Limited Ordinary shares (CRGO) is the stronger pick with 23.

9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 4% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW). C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) offers the better valuation at 35. 5x trailing P/E (27. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Freightos Limited Ordinary shares (CRGO) a "Buy" — based on 3 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.

Over the past 5 years, C.

H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) delivered a total return of +84. 1%, compared to -79. 0% for Freightos Limited Ordinary shares (CRGO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CHRW returned +163. 6% versus CRGO's -79. 0%. 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), C.

H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 95β versus Freightos Limited Ordinary shares's 1. 98β — meaning CRGO is approximately 108% more volatile than CHRW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Freightos Limited Ordinary shares (CRGO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 88% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Freightos Limited Ordinary shares (CRGO) is pulling ahead at 23.

9% versus -8. 4% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. grew EPS 25. 1% year-over-year, compared to 23. 9% for Freightos Limited Ordinary shares. Over a 3-year CAGR, CRGO leads at 15. 6% 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.

C.

H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 6% net margin versus -59. 5% for Freightos Limited Ordinary shares — meaning it keeps 3. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CHRW leads at 4. 9% versus -65. 0% for CRGO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CRGO leads at 66. 8%, 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.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CRGO: 46.

3% to $3. 00.

In this comparison, CHRW (1.

4% yield) pays a dividend. CRGO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, C.

H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 95), 1. 4% yield, +163. 6% 10Y return). Freightos Limited Ordinary shares (CRGO) carries a higher beta of 1. 98 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CHRW: +163. 6%, CRGO: -79. 0%), 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 Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: CRGO is a small-cap high-growth stock; CHRW is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. CHRW pays a dividend while CRGO 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.