Auto - Dealerships
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CRMT vs DRVN vs MNRO vs AN vs LAD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Dealerships
Auto - Parts
Auto - Dealerships
Auto - Dealerships
CRMT vs DRVN vs MNRO vs AN vs LAD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Parts | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships |
| Market Cap | $106M | $2.26B | $523M | $7.05B | $6.64B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.04B | $2.17B | $1.18B | $27.49B | $37.73B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-123M | $-198M | $-13M | $679M | $711M |
| Gross Margin | 33.1% | 52.1% | 34.8% | 17.7% | 15.2% |
| Operating Margin | 1.7% | -7.3% | 2.3% | 4.4% | 3.7% |
| Forward P/E | 5.5x | 10.9x | 32.4x | 9.7x | 8.5x |
| Total Debt | $845M | $4.00B | $529M | $10.18B | $14.69B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10M | $170M | $21M | $59M | $342M |
CRMT vs DRVN vs MNRO vs AN vs LAD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| America's Car-Mart,… (CRMT) | 100 | 10.8 | -89.2% |
| Driven Brands Holdi… (DRVN) | 100 | 48.9 | -51.1% |
| Monro, Inc. (MNRO) | 100 | 29.8 | -70.2% |
| AutoNation, Inc. (AN) | 100 | 288.0 | +188.0% |
| Lithia Motors, Inc. (LAD) | 100 | 91.4 | -8.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CRMT vs DRVN vs MNRO vs AN vs LAD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CRMT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (5.5x vs 8.5x)
DRVN is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.68, current ratio 1.52x
- Beta 0.68, current ratio 1.52x
- Beta 0.68 vs CRMT's 1.84
MNRO has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in dividends and momentum.
- 6.4% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs LAD's 0.7%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
- +45.4% vs CRMT's -72.6%
AN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- 324.6% 10Y total return vs LAD's 264.5%
- PEG 0.31 vs LAD's 0.80
- 2.5% margin vs CRMT's -11.8%
- 4.8% ROA vs CRMT's -7.5%, ROIC 8.5% vs 5.2%
LAD is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 1.09, yield 0.7%
- Rev growth 4.0%, EPS growth 9.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 10.1%
- 4.0% revenue growth vs MNRO's -6.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 4.0% revenue growth vs MNRO's -6.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (5.5x vs 8.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 2.5% margin vs CRMT's -11.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.68 vs CRMT's 1.84 | |
| Dividends | 6.4% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs LAD's 0.7%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +45.4% vs CRMT's -72.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.8% ROA vs CRMT's -7.5%, ROIC 8.5% vs 5.2% |
CRMT vs DRVN vs MNRO vs AN vs LAD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CRMT vs DRVN vs MNRO vs AN vs LAD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AN leads in 2 of 6 categories
CRMT leads 1 • DRVN leads 0 • MNRO leads 0 • LAD leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — DRVN and AN and LAD each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LAD is the larger business by revenue, generating $37.7B annually — 36.3x CRMT's $1.0B. AN is the more profitable business, keeping 2.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRMT's -11.8%. On growth, LAD holds the edge at +1.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.0B | $2.2B | $1.2B | $27.5B | $37.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $26M | $17M | $90M | $1.5B | $1.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$123M | -$198M | -$13M | $679M | $711M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $14M | $41M | $50M | -$104M | $1.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +33.1% | +52.1% | +34.8% | +17.7% | +15.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +1.7% | -7.3% | +2.3% | +4.4% | +3.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -11.8% | -9.1% | -1.1% | +2.5% | +1.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +1.4% | +1.9% | +4.2% | -0.4% | +5.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -31.7% | -9.5% | -4.0% | -2.1% | +1.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -35.2% | +5.1% | +150.0% | +33.0% | -46.1% |
Valuation Metrics
CRMT leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 5.5x trailing earnings, CRMT trades at a 54% valuation discount to AN's 12.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AN offers better value at 0.38x vs LAD's 0.85x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $106M | $2.3B | $523M | $7.0B | $6.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $941M | $6.1B | $1.0B | $17.2B | $21.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 5.49x | -7.55x | -79.23x | 12.05x | 9.01x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 10.90x | 32.40x | 9.70x | 8.50x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.38x | 0.85x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.28x | 126.43x | 9.41x | 10.83x | 11.38x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.08x | 0.97x | 0.44x | 0.26x | 0.18x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.17x | 3.63x | 0.84x | 3.34x | 1.12x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 4.96x | — | 34.61x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AN delivers a 28.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $28 in annual profit, vs $-28 for DRVN. MNRO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.85x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to DRVN's 6.58x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DRVN scores 6/9 vs LAD's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -22.6% | -28.4% | -2.1% | +28.4% | +10.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.5% | -4.2% | -0.8% | +4.8% | +2.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.2% | -2.2% | +2.5% | +8.5% | +5.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.0% | -2.7% | +3.4% | +17.2% | +8.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.48x | 6.58x | 0.85x | 4.35x | 2.22x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $835M | $3.8B | $509M | $10.1B | $14.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10M | $170M | $21M | $59M | $342M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $845M | $4.0B | $529M | $10.2B | $14.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.18x | -1.23x | 0.09x | 4.53x | 2.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AN leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AN five years ago would be worth $19,409 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $842 for CRMT. Over the past 12 months, MNRO leads with a +45.4% total return vs CRMT's -72.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AN at 15.1% vs CRMT's -46.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -47.3% | -5.2% | -10.1% | -0.6% | -12.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -72.6% | -24.6% | +45.4% | +16.9% | -0.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -84.9% | -51.1% | -57.7% | +52.4% | +35.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.6% | -51.1% | -67.6% | +94.1% | -21.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -49.6% | -48.5% | -62.4% | +324.6% | +264.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -46.7% | -21.2% | -24.9% | +15.1% | +10.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — DRVN and AN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
DRVN is the less volatile stock with a 0.68 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CRMT's 1.84 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AN currently trades 89.7% from its 52-week high vs CRMT's 20.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.84x | 0.68x | 1.50x | 0.85x | 1.09x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $62.72 | $19.74 | $23.91 | $228.92 | $360.56 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.63 | $9.80 | $12.20 | $174.34 | $239.78 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +20.4% | +69.7% | +72.9% | +89.7% | +80.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.8 | 54.3 | 55.4 | 53.7 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 150K | 2.0M | 770K | 412K | 313K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — MNRO and LAD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRMT as "Buy", DRVN as "Buy", MNRO as "Hold", AN as "Buy", LAD as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 129.5% upside for MNRO (target: $40) vs 9.5% for CRMT (target: $14). For income investors, MNRO offers the higher dividend yield at 6.43% vs LAD's 0.75%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $14.00 | $18.00 | $40.00 | $248.00 | $411.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 9 | 15 | 24 | 34 | 26 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.0% | — | +6.4% | — | +0.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.01 | — | $1.12 | — | $2.18 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.4% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +11.2% | +14.5% |
AN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). CRMT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
CRMT vs DRVN vs MNRO vs AN vs LAD: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CRMT or DRVN or MNRO or AN or LAD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Lithia Motors, Inc.
(LAD) is the stronger pick with 4. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 4% for Monro, Inc. (MNRO). America's Car-Mart, Inc. (CRMT) offers the better valuation at 5. 5x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate America's Car-Mart, Inc. (CRMT) a "Buy" — based on 9 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.
02Which has the better valuation — CRMT or DRVN or MNRO or AN or LAD?
On trailing P/E, America's Car-Mart, Inc.
(CRMT) is the cheapest at 5. 5x versus AutoNation, Inc. at 12. 0x. On forward P/E, Lithia Motors, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 5x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: AutoNation, Inc. wins at 0. 31x versus Lithia Motors, Inc. 's 0. 80x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CRMT or DRVN or MNRO or AN or LAD?
Over the past 5 years, AutoNation, Inc.
(AN) delivered a total return of +94. 1%, compared to -91. 6% for America's Car-Mart, Inc. (CRMT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AN returned +324. 6% versus MNRO's -62. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CRMT or DRVN or MNRO or AN or LAD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Driven Brands Holdings Inc.
(DRVN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 68β versus America's Car-Mart, Inc. 's 1. 84β — meaning CRMT is approximately 169% more volatile than DRVN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Monro, Inc. (MNRO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 85% versus 7% for Driven Brands Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CRMT or DRVN or MNRO or AN or LAD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Lithia Motors, Inc.
(LAD) is pulling ahead at 4. 0% versus -6. 4% for Monro, Inc. (MNRO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: America's Car-Mart, Inc. grew EPS 147. 5% year-over-year, compared to -119. 3% for Monro, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, DRVN leads at 16. 8% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — CRMT or DRVN or MNRO or AN or LAD?
AutoNation, Inc.
(AN) is the more profitable company, earning 2. 3% net margin versus -12. 5% for Driven Brands Holdings Inc. — meaning it keeps 2. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CRMT leads at 6. 7% versus -6. 0% for DRVN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — DRVN leads at 52. 4%, 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.
07Is CRMT or DRVN or MNRO or AN or LAD more undervalued right now?
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, AutoNation, Inc. (AN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 31x versus Lithia Motors, Inc. 's 0. 80x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Lithia Motors, Inc. (LAD) trades at 8. 5x forward P/E versus 32. 4x for Monro, Inc. — 23. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MNRO: 129. 5% to $40. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CRMT or DRVN or MNRO or AN or LAD?
In this comparison, MNRO (6.
4% yield), LAD (0. 7% yield) pay a dividend. CRMT, DRVN, AN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CRMT or DRVN or MNRO or AN or LAD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Lithia Motors, Inc.
(LAD) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 09), 0. 7% yield, +264. 5% 10Y return). America's Car-Mart, Inc. (CRMT) carries a higher beta of 1. 84 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LAD: +264. 5%, CRMT: -49. 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.
10What are the main differences between CRMT and DRVN and MNRO and AN and LAD?
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: CRMT is a small-cap deep-value stock; DRVN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MNRO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; AN is a small-cap deep-value stock; LAD is a small-cap deep-value stock. MNRO, LAD pay a dividend while CRMT, DRVN, AN do 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.