EZPW vs FCFS

For growth investors, EZCORP, Inc.

(EZPW) is the stronger pick with 9. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 8. 0% for FirstCash Holdings, Inc (FCFS). EZCORP, Inc. (EZPW) offers the better valuation at 23. 2x trailing P/E (18. 4x 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.

On trailing P/E, EZCORP, Inc.

(EZPW) is the cheapest at 23. 2x versus FirstCash Holdings, Inc at 30. 3x. On forward P/E, EZCORP, Inc. is actually cheaper at 18. 4x.

Over the past 5 years, EZCORP, Inc.

(EZPW) delivered a total return of +406. 6%, compared to +206. 7% for FirstCash Holdings, Inc (FCFS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EZPW returned +590. 8% versus FCFS's +397. 9%. 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), FirstCash Holdings, Inc (FCFS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

31β versus EZCORP, Inc. 's 0. 82β — meaning EZPW is approximately 164% more volatile than FCFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, EZCORP, Inc. (EZPW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 75% versus 124% for FirstCash Holdings, Inc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), EZCORP, Inc.

(EZPW) is pulling ahead at 9. 7% versus 8. 0% for FirstCash Holdings, Inc (FCFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: FirstCash Holdings, Inc grew EPS 29. 5% year-over-year, compared to 29. 1% for EZCORP, 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.

FirstCash Holdings, Inc (FCFS) is the more profitable company, earning 9.

0% net margin versus 8. 6% for EZCORP, Inc. — meaning it keeps 9. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FCFS leads at 15. 4% versus 11. 7% for EZPW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EZPW leads at 58. 5%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, EZCORP, Inc.

(EZPW) trades at 18. 4x forward P/E versus 20. 9x for FirstCash Holdings, Inc — 2. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FCFS: 12. 1% to $252. 00.

In this comparison, FCFS (0.

7% yield) pays a dividend. EZPW does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

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%, EZPW: +590. 8%), 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 Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

FCFS pays a dividend while EZPW 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.