Financial - Credit Services
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
EZPW vs CASH vs FCFS vs NAVI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Financial - Credit Services
Financial - Credit Services
EZPW vs CASH vs FCFS vs NAVI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Credit Services | Banks - Regional | Financial - Credit Services | Financial - Credit Services |
| Market Cap | $1.93B | $1.91B | $9.93B | $826M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.27B | $685M | $3.66B | $3.23B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $123M | $191M | $354M | $-60M |
| Gross Margin | 58.5% | 90.0% | 51.7% | 87.0% |
| Operating Margin | 11.7% | 32.6% | 15.4% | 77.1% |
| Forward P/E | 18.4x | 10.1x | 20.9x | 12.3x |
| Total Debt | $764M | $42M | $2.82B | $45.71B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $470M | $121M | $125M | $2.10B |
EZPW vs CASH vs FCFS vs NAVI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| EZCORP, Inc. (EZPW) | 100 | 637.2 | +537.2% |
| Pathward Financial,… (CASH) | 100 | 483.2 | +383.2% |
| FirstCash Holdings,… (FCFS) | 100 | 322.3 | +222.3% |
| Navient Corporation (NAVI) | 100 | 118.1 | +18.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EZPW vs CASH vs FCFS vs NAVI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EZPW has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 9.7%, EPS growth 29.1%
- 5.9% 10Y total return vs CASH's 451.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.82, Low D/E 74.5%, current ratio 5.61x
- 9.7% NII/revenue growth vs NAVI's -23.7%
CASH is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency and bank quality.
- PEG 0.46 vs FCFS's 0.88
- NIM 7.1% vs NAVI's 1.1%
- Lower P/E (10.1x vs 20.9x), PEG 0.46 vs 0.88
FCFS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 0.31, yield 0.7%
- Beta 0.31, yield 0.7%, current ratio 4.55x
- Beta 0.31 vs NAVI's 0.92, lower leverage
- 0.7% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs NAVI's 7.2%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
NAVI is the clearest fit if your priority is quality and efficiency.
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs CASH's 0.6% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs CASH's 0.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.7% NII/revenue growth vs NAVI's -23.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.1x vs 20.9x), PEG 0.46 vs 0.88 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs CASH's 0.6% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.31 vs NAVI's 0.92, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.7% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs NAVI's 7.2%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +124.3% vs NAVI's -25.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs CASH's 0.6% |
EZPW vs CASH vs FCFS vs NAVI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
EZPW vs CASH vs FCFS vs NAVI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CASH leads in 2 of 6 categories
NAVI leads 1 • EZPW leads 1 • FCFS leads 1 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CASH leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FCFS is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.7B annually — 5.3x CASH's $685M. CASH is the more profitable business, keeping 27.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NAVI's -2.5%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.3B | $685M | $3.7B | $3.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $201M | $288M | $950M | $544M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $123M | $191M | $354M | -$60M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $123M | $422M | $553M | $323M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +58.5% | +90.0% | +51.7% | +87.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.7% | +32.6% | +15.4% | +77.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +8.6% | +27.1% | +9.0% | -2.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.7% | +34.5% | +12.8% | +13.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +37.5% | +27.6% | +29.9% | +9.7% |
Valuation Metrics
NAVI leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.1x trailing earnings, CASH trades at a 63% valuation discount to FCFS's 30.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CASH offers better value at 0.51x vs FCFS's 1.28x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.9B | $1.9B | $9.9B | $826M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.2B | $1.8B | $12.6B | $44.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 23.15x | 11.12x | 30.31x | -10.85x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 18.35x | 10.09x | 20.89x | 12.29x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.51x | 1.28x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.25x | 6.46x | 12.70x | 17.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.52x | 2.78x | 2.71x | 0.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.67x | 2.40x | 4.40x | 0.36x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 17.49x | 8.05x | 21.16x | 1.87x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CASH leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CASH delivers a 22.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $23 in annual profit, vs $-2 for NAVI. CASH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NAVI's 19.05x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CASH scores 8/9 vs NAVI's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +12.5% | +22.9% | +15.9% | -2.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.4% | +2.6% | +7.0% | -0.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.1% | +15.6% | +9.2% | +3.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.0% | +17.3% | +12.5% | +5.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.75x | 0.05x | 1.24x | 19.05x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $295M | -$78M | $2.7B | $43.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $470M | $121M | $125M | $2.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $764M | $42M | $2.8B | $45.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 6.63x | 22.12x | 4.72x | 0.21x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
EZPW leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in EZPW five years ago would be worth $50,663 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,915 for NAVI. Over the past 12 months, EZPW leads with a +124.3% total return vs NAVI's -25.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EZPW at 54.0% vs NAVI's -10.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +63.9% | +21.9% | +43.7% | -30.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +124.3% | +7.0% | +69.7% | -25.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +264.9% | +103.4% | +121.2% | -27.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +406.6% | +76.4% | +206.7% | -30.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +590.8% | +451.0% | +397.9% | +15.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +54.0% | +26.7% | +30.3% | -10.3% |
Risk & Volatility
FCFS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FCFS is the less volatile stock with a 0.31 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NAVI's 0.92 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FCFS currently trades 97.5% from its 52-week high vs NAVI's 54.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.82x | 0.87x | 0.31x | 0.92x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $37.13 | $101.26 | $230.72 | $16.07 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $12.85 | $65.87 | $119.21 | $7.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +88.6% | +86.5% | +97.5% | +54.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 79.8 | 40.8 | 73.5 | 48.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 733K | 217K | 344K | 923K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FCFS and NAVI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EZPW as "Buy", CASH as "Buy", FCFS as "Hold", NAVI as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 12.1% upside for FCFS (target: $252) vs -17.1% for EZPW (target: $27). For income investors, NAVI offers the higher dividend yield at 7.24% vs CASH's 0.23%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $27.25 | $82.00 | $252.00 | $8.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 15 | 9 | 19 | 24 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.2% | +0.7% | +7.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 10 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.20 | $1.59 | $0.64 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.4% | +8.6% | +1.2% | +13.4% |
CASH leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NAVI leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
EZPW vs CASH vs FCFS vs NAVI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EZPW or CASH or FCFS or NAVI a better buy right now?
For growth investors, EZCORP, Inc.
(EZPW) is the stronger pick with 9. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -23. 7% for Navient Corporation (NAVI). Pathward Financial, Inc. (CASH) offers the better valuation at 11. 1x trailing P/E (10. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate EZCORP, Inc. (EZPW) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — EZPW or CASH or FCFS or NAVI?
On trailing P/E, Pathward Financial, Inc.
(CASH) is the cheapest at 11. 1x versus FirstCash Holdings, Inc at 30. 3x. On forward P/E, Pathward Financial, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Pathward Financial, Inc. wins at 0. 46x versus FirstCash Holdings, Inc's 0. 88x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EZPW or CASH or FCFS or NAVI?
Over the past 5 years, EZCORP, Inc.
(EZPW) delivered a total return of +406. 6%, compared to -30. 9% for Navient Corporation (NAVI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EZPW returned +590. 8% versus NAVI's +15. 3%. 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 — EZPW or CASH or FCFS or NAVI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), FirstCash Holdings, Inc (FCFS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
31β versus Navient Corporation's 0. 92β — meaning NAVI is approximately 199% more volatile than FCFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Pathward Financial, Inc. (CASH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 19% for Navient Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EZPW or CASH or FCFS or NAVI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), EZCORP, Inc.
(EZPW) is pulling ahead at 9. 7% versus -23. 7% for Navient Corporation (NAVI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: FirstCash Holdings, Inc grew EPS 29. 5% year-over-year, compared to -168. 6% for Navient Corporation. 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 — EZPW or CASH or FCFS or NAVI?
Pathward Financial, Inc.
(CASH) is the more profitable company, earning 27. 1% net margin versus -2. 5% for Navient Corporation — meaning it keeps 27. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NAVI leads at 77. 1% versus 11. 7% for EZPW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CASH leads at 90. 0%, 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 EZPW or CASH or FCFS or NAVI 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, Pathward Financial, Inc. (CASH) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 46x versus FirstCash Holdings, Inc's 0. 88x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Pathward Financial, Inc. (CASH) trades at 10. 1x forward P/E versus 20. 9x for FirstCash Holdings, Inc — 10. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FCFS: 12. 1% to $252. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — EZPW or CASH or FCFS or NAVI?
In this comparison, NAVI (7.
2% yield), FCFS (0. 7% yield), CASH (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. EZPW does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EZPW or CASH or FCFS or NAVI better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, FirstCash Holdings, Inc (FCFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
31), 0. 7% yield, +397. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FCFS: +397. 9%, CASH: +451. 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.
10What are the main differences between EZPW and CASH and FCFS and NAVI?
Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: EZPW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CASH is a small-cap deep-value stock; FCFS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NAVI is a small-cap income-oriented stock. FCFS, NAVI pay a dividend while EZPW, CASH 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.