Auto - Dealerships
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
RUSHA vs SAH vs AN vs LAD vs ABG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Dealerships
Auto - Dealerships
Auto - Dealerships
Auto - Dealerships
RUSHA vs SAH vs AN vs LAD vs ABG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships |
| Market Cap | $5.61B | $2.76B | $7.07B | $6.70B | $3.87B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7.43B | $15.15B | $27.49B | $37.73B | $17.96B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $264M | $119M | $679M | $711M | $408M |
| Gross Margin | 19.4% | 14.6% | 17.7% | 15.2% | 16.9% |
| Operating Margin | 5.3% | 3.6% | 4.4% | 3.7% | 5.2% |
| Forward P/E | 19.5x | 12.2x | 9.6x | 8.6x | 7.7x |
| Total Debt | $1.55B | $4.23B | $10.18B | $14.69B | $6.33B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $213M | $6M | $59M | $342M | $40M |
RUSHA vs SAH vs AN vs LAD vs ABG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rush Enterprises, I… (RUSHA) | 100 | 390.9 | +290.9% |
| Sonic Automotive, I… (SAH) | 100 | 309.0 | +209.0% |
| AutoNation, Inc. (AN) | 100 | 521.7 | +421.7% |
| Lithia Motors, Inc. (LAD) | 100 | 243.8 | +143.8% |
| Asbury Automotive G… (ABG) | 100 | 277.2 | +177.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RUSHA vs SAH vs AN vs LAD vs ABG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RUSHA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 8.2% 10Y total return vs SAH's 398.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.98, Low D/E 69.6%, current ratio 1.40x
- Beta 0.98, yield 1.0%, current ratio 1.40x
- 3.5% margin vs SAH's 0.8%
SAH is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 1.05, yield 1.7%
- 6.5% revenue growth vs RUSHA's -4.7%
- 1.7% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs LAD's 0.7%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
AN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.30 vs RUSHA's 1.89
- PEG 0.30 vs 0.81
- Beta 0.86 vs LAD's 1.10
LAD lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
ABG is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 4.7%, EPS growth 16.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.5% revenue growth vs RUSHA's -4.7% | |
| Value | PEG 0.30 vs 0.81 | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.5% margin vs SAH's 0.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.86 vs LAD's 1.10 | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs LAD's 0.7%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +49.9% vs ABG's -11.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.7% ROA vs SAH's 2.0%, ROIC 8.2% vs 7.8% |
RUSHA vs SAH vs AN vs LAD vs ABG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
RUSHA vs SAH vs AN vs LAD vs ABG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RUSHA leads in 3 of 6 categories
ABG leads 1 • SAH leads 0 • AN leads 0 • LAD leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RUSHA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LAD is the larger business by revenue, generating $37.7B annually — 5.1x RUSHA's $7.4B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 3.5% (RUSHA) to 0.8% (SAH). On growth, LAD holds the edge at +1.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $7.4B | $15.2B | $27.5B | $37.7B | $18.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $555M | $705M | $1.5B | $1.8B | $1.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $264M | $119M | $679M | $711M | $408M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $212M | $425M | -$104M | $1.9B | $651M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +19.4% | +14.6% | +17.7% | +15.2% | +16.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +5.3% | +3.6% | +4.4% | +3.7% | +5.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.5% | +0.8% | +2.5% | +1.9% | +2.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.9% | +2.8% | -0.4% | +5.0% | +3.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -11.8% | -0.6% | -2.1% | +1.0% | -0.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -11.0% | -18.6% | +33.0% | -46.1% | +47.2% |
Valuation Metrics
ABG leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.0x trailing earnings, ABG trades at a 66% valuation discount to SAH's 23.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AN offers better value at 0.38x vs RUSHA's 2.14x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.6B | $2.8B | $7.1B | $6.7B | $3.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.9B | $7.0B | $17.2B | $21.1B | $10.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 22.11x | 23.74x | 12.09x | 9.10x | 7.97x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 19.49x | 12.20x | 9.64x | 8.56x | 7.69x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.14x | — | 0.38x | 0.86x | 0.58x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 14.96x | 9.91x | 10.84x | 11.42x | 9.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.75x | 0.18x | 0.26x | 0.18x | 0.21x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.62x | 2.64x | 3.35x | 1.13x | 1.00x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.78x | 6.61x | — | 34.94x | 6.71x |
Profitability & Efficiency
RUSHA 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 $11 for LAD. RUSHA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.70x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AN's 4.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SAH scores 6/9 vs LAD's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +12.0% | +11.2% | +28.4% | +10.6% | +14.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.7% | +2.0% | +4.8% | +2.9% | +4.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.2% | +7.8% | +8.5% | +5.2% | +8.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.3% | +16.3% | +17.2% | +8.2% | +12.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.70x | 3.96x | 4.35x | 2.22x | 1.63x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.3B | $4.2B | $10.1B | $14.3B | $6.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $213M | $6M | $59M | $342M | $40M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.6B | $4.2B | $10.2B | $14.7B | $6.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 8.49x | 1.89x | 4.53x | 2.34x | 3.15x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RUSHA leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RUSHA five years ago would be worth $22,545 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,226 for LAD. Over the past 12 months, RUSHA leads with a +49.9% total return vs ABG's -11.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RUSHA at 29.6% vs ABG's -0.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +34.0% | +32.3% | -0.2% | -11.2% | -14.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +49.9% | +26.3% | +14.7% | -2.3% | -11.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +117.8% | +111.8% | +52.9% | +37.4% | -0.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +125.5% | +69.8% | +96.9% | -17.7% | -2.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +824.6% | +398.5% | +326.0% | +268.4% | +251.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +29.6% | +28.4% | +15.2% | +11.2% | -0.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — RUSHA and AN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
AN is the less volatile stock with a 0.86 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LAD's 1.10 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RUSHA currently trades 93.9% from its 52-week high vs ABG's 73.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.98x | 1.05x | 0.86x | 1.10x | 1.03x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $76.99 | $89.62 | $228.92 | $360.56 | $274.50 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $45.67 | $54.11 | $175.80 | $239.78 | $184.61 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +93.9% | +90.6% | +90.0% | +81.5% | +73.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.7 | 72.3 | 54.3 | 61.9 | 48.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 422K | 302K | 407K | 312K | 247K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — SAH and LAD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RUSHA as "Hold", SAH as "Hold", AN as "Buy", LAD as "Buy", ABG as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 30.5% upside for LAD (target: $384) vs -11.3% for SAH (target: $72). For income investors, SAH offers the higher dividend yield at 1.73% vs LAD's 0.74%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $82.00 | $72.00 | $247.00 | $383.75 | $234.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 17 | 16 | 34 | 26 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.0% | +1.7% | — | +0.7% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 10 | 1 | 12 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.72 | $1.41 | — | $2.18 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.5% | +3.0% | +11.2% | +14.3% | +2.9% |
RUSHA leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ABG leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
RUSHA vs SAH vs AN vs LAD vs ABG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RUSHA or SAH or AN or LAD or ABG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Sonic Automotive, Inc.
(SAH) is the stronger pick with 6. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 7% for Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA). Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. (ABG) offers the better valuation at 8. 0x trailing P/E (7. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate AutoNation, Inc. (AN) a "Buy" — based on 34 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 — RUSHA or SAH or AN or LAD or ABG?
On trailing P/E, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc.
(ABG) is the cheapest at 8. 0x versus Sonic Automotive, Inc. at 23. 7x. On forward P/E, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: AutoNation, Inc. wins at 0. 30x versus Rush Enterprises, Inc. 's 1. 89x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RUSHA or SAH or AN or LAD or ABG?
Over the past 5 years, Rush Enterprises, Inc.
(RUSHA) delivered a total return of +125. 5%, compared to -17. 7% for Lithia Motors, Inc. (LAD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RUSHA returned +824. 6% versus ABG's +251. 6%. 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 — RUSHA or SAH or AN or LAD or ABG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AutoNation, Inc.
(AN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 86β versus Lithia Motors, Inc. 's 1. 10β — meaning LAD is approximately 29% more volatile than AN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 70% versus 4% for AutoNation, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RUSHA or SAH or AN or LAD or ABG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Sonic Automotive, Inc.
(SAH) is pulling ahead at 6. 5% versus -4. 7% for Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. grew EPS 16. 9% year-over-year, compared to -44. 7% for Sonic Automotive, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LAD leads at 10. 1% 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 — RUSHA or SAH or AN or LAD or ABG?
Rush Enterprises, Inc.
(RUSHA) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 5% net margin versus 0. 8% for Sonic Automotive, Inc. — meaning it keeps 3. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABG leads at 5. 6% versus 3. 6% for SAH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RUSHA leads at 18. 7%, 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 RUSHA or SAH or AN or LAD or ABG 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. 30x versus Rush Enterprises, Inc. 's 1. 89x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. (ABG) trades at 7. 7x forward P/E versus 19. 5x for Rush Enterprises, Inc. — 11. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LAD: 30. 5% to $383. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — RUSHA or SAH or AN or LAD or ABG?
In this comparison, SAH (1.
7% yield), RUSHA (1. 0% yield), LAD (0. 7% yield) pay a dividend. AN, ABG do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RUSHA or SAH or AN or LAD or ABG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Rush Enterprises, Inc.
(RUSHA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 98), 1. 0% yield, +824. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (RUSHA: +824. 6%, ABG: +251. 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 RUSHA and SAH and AN and LAD and ABG?
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: RUSHA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SAH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AN is a small-cap deep-value stock; LAD is a small-cap deep-value stock; ABG is a small-cap deep-value stock. RUSHA, SAH, LAD pay a dividend while AN, ABG 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.