Financial - Credit Services
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
ENVA vs FISV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Information Technology Services
ENVA vs FISV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Credit Services | Information Technology Services |
| Market Cap | $4.22B | $30.63B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.15B | $21.09B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $327M | $3.20B |
| Gross Margin | 50.1% | 45.2% |
| Operating Margin | 23.5% | 24.8% |
| Forward P/E | 10.3x | 7.1x |
| Total Debt | $4.56B | $29.12B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $72M | $798M |
ENVA vs FISV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enova International… (ENVA) | 100 | 1196.3 | +1096.3% |
| Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) | 100 | 58.7 | -41.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ENVA vs FISV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ENVA has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 18.6%, EPS growth 55.9%
- 20.1% 10Y total return vs FISV's 15.4%
- 18.6% NII/revenue growth vs FISV's 3.6%
FISV is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 0.94
- Lower volatility, beta 0.94, current ratio 1.03x
- Beta 0.94, current ratio 1.03x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.6% NII/revenue growth vs FISV's 3.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.1x vs 10.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.2% margin vs ENVA's 9.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.94 vs ENVA's 1.48, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +80.9% vs FISV's -69.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.2% ROA vs FISV's 4.0%, ROIC 10.4% vs 8.1% |
ENVA vs FISV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ENVA vs FISV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ENVA leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FISV is the larger business by revenue, generating $21.1B annually — 6.7x ENVA's $3.2B. FISV is the more profitable business, keeping 15.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ENVA's 9.8%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.2B | $21.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $815M | $7.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $327M | $3.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.9B | $4.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +50.1% | +45.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +23.5% | +24.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +9.8% | +15.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +56.2% | +21.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -2.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +28.6% | -29.1% |
Valuation Metrics
FISV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.0x trailing earnings, FISV trades at a 38% valuation discount to ENVA's 14.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, FISV's 6.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ENVA's 11.2x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.2B | $30.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $8.7B | $59.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 14.62x | 9.03x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.30x | 7.07x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.26x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.15x | 6.66x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.34x | 1.45x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.34x | 1.22x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 2.38x | 7.06x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ENVA leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ENVA delivers a 24.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $25 in annual profit, vs $12 for FISV. FISV carries lower financial leverage with a 1.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ENVA's 3.41x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ENVA scores 6/9 vs FISV's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +24.9% | +12.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.2% | +4.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.4% | +8.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.5% | +10.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.41x | 1.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.5B | $28.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $72M | $798M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.6B | $29.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 79.01x | 5.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ENVA leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ENVA five years ago would be worth $48,228 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,913 for FISV. Over the past 12 months, ENVA leads with a +80.9% total return vs FISV's -69.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ENVA at 57.5% vs FISV's -21.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +4.5% | -12.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +80.9% | -69.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +290.9% | -52.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +382.3% | -50.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2010.7% | +15.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +57.5% | -21.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ENVA and FISV each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FISV is the less volatile stock with a 0.94 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ENVA's 1.48 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ENVA currently trades 95.8% from its 52-week high vs FISV's 29.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.48x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $176.68 | $191.91 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $89.00 | $52.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +95.8% | +29.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.5 | 60.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 225K | 5.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates ENVA as "Buy" and FISV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 30.3% upside for FISV (target: $75) vs 17.9% for ENVA (target: $200).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $199.50 | $74.64 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 60 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.1% | +19.3% |
ENVA leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). FISV leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
ENVA vs FISV: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ENVA or FISV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Enova International, Inc.
(ENVA) is the stronger pick with 18. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 6% for Fiserv, Inc. (FISV). Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) offers the better valuation at 9. 0x trailing P/E (7. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Enova International, Inc. (ENVA) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — ENVA or FISV?
On trailing P/E, Fiserv, Inc.
(FISV) is the cheapest at 9. 0x versus Enova International, Inc. at 14. 6x. On forward P/E, Fiserv, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 1x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ENVA or FISV?
Over the past 5 years, Enova International, Inc.
(ENVA) delivered a total return of +382. 3%, compared to -50. 9% for Fiserv, Inc. (FISV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ENVA returned +20. 1% versus FISV's +15. 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 — ENVA or FISV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fiserv, Inc.
(FISV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 94β versus Enova International, Inc. 's 1. 48β — meaning ENVA is approximately 57% more volatile than FISV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 113% versus 3% for Enova International, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ENVA or FISV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Enova International, Inc.
(ENVA) is pulling ahead at 18. 6% versus 3. 6% for Fiserv, Inc. (FISV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Enova International, Inc. grew EPS 55. 9% year-over-year, compared to 17. 8% for Fiserv, Inc.. 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 — ENVA or FISV?
Fiserv, Inc.
(FISV) is the more profitable company, earning 16. 4% net margin versus 9. 8% for Enova International, Inc. — meaning it keeps 16. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FISV leads at 26. 9% versus 23. 5% for ENVA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FISV leads at 59. 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 ENVA or FISV more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Fiserv, Inc.
(FISV) trades at 7. 1x forward P/E versus 10. 3x for Enova International, Inc. — 3. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FISV: 30. 3% to $74. 64.
08Which pays a better dividend — ENVA or FISV?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is ENVA or FISV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Fiserv, Inc.
(FISV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 94)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FISV: +15. 4%, ENVA: +20. 1%), 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 ENVA and FISV?
These companies operate in different sectors (ENVA (Financial Services) and FISV (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ENVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; FISV is a mid-cap deep-value stock. 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.