Industrial - Distribution
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TITN vs RUSHA vs LAD vs ABG vs AN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Dealerships
Auto - Dealerships
Auto - Dealerships
Auto - Dealerships
TITN vs RUSHA vs LAD vs ABG vs AN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial - Distribution | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships |
| Market Cap | $502M | $5.53B | $6.64B | $3.87B | $7.05B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.43B | $7.43B | $37.73B | $17.96B | $27.49B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-54M | $264M | $711M | $408M | $679M |
| Gross Margin | 15.8% | 19.4% | 15.2% | 16.9% | 17.7% |
| Operating Margin | -0.1% | 5.3% | 3.7% | 5.2% | 4.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 19.2x | 8.5x | 7.7x | 9.7x |
| Total Debt | $114M | $1.55B | $14.69B | $6.33B | $10.18B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $28M | $213M | $342M | $40M | $59M |
TITN vs RUSHA vs LAD vs ABG vs AN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Titan Machinery Inc. (TITN) | 100 | 205.3 | +105.3% |
| Rush Enterprises, I… (RUSHA) | 100 | 385.4 | +285.4% |
| Lithia Motors, Inc. (LAD) | 100 | 241.5 | +141.5% |
| Asbury Automotive G… (ABG) | 100 | 277.2 | +177.2% |
| AutoNation, Inc. (AN) | 100 | 520.0 | +420.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TITN vs RUSHA vs LAD vs ABG vs AN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TITN lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
RUSHA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.98, yield 1.0%
- 8.1% 10Y total return vs AN's 324.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.98, Low D/E 69.6%, current ratio 1.40x
- Beta 0.98, yield 1.0%, current ratio 1.40x
Among these 5 stocks, LAD doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ABG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 4.7%, EPS growth 16.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.3%
- 4.7% revenue growth vs TITN's -10.2%
- Lower P/E (7.7x vs 8.5x), PEG 0.56 vs 0.80
AN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.31 vs RUSHA's 1.86
- Beta 0.85 vs TITN's 1.59
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 4.7% revenue growth vs TITN's -10.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.7x vs 8.5x), PEG 0.56 vs 0.80 | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.5% margin vs TITN's -2.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.85 vs TITN's 1.59 | |
| Dividends | 1.0% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs LAD's 0.7%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +50.8% vs ABG's -8.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.7% ROA vs TITN's -3.1%, ROIC 8.2% vs -0.2% |
TITN vs RUSHA vs LAD vs ABG vs AN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TITN vs RUSHA vs LAD vs ABG vs AN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RUSHA leads in 2 of 6 categories
TITN leads 2 • LAD leads 0 • ABG leads 0 • AN 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 — 15.5x TITN's $2.4B. RUSHA is the more profitable business, keeping 3.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TITN's -2.2%. On growth, LAD holds the edge at +1.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.4B | $7.4B | $37.7B | $18.0B | $27.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $35M | $555M | $1.8B | $1.0B | $1.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$54M | $264M | $711M | $408M | $679M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $240M | $212M | $1.9B | $651M | -$104M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +15.8% | +19.4% | +15.2% | +16.9% | +17.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -0.1% | +5.3% | +3.7% | +5.2% | +4.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.2% | +3.5% | +1.9% | +2.3% | +2.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +9.9% | +2.9% | +5.0% | +3.6% | -0.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -15.5% | -11.8% | +1.0% | -0.9% | -2.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +17.6% | -11.0% | -46.1% | +47.2% | +33.0% |
Valuation Metrics
TITN leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.0x trailing earnings, ABG trades at a 63% valuation discount to RUSHA's 21.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AN offers better value at 0.38x vs RUSHA's 2.11x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $502M | $5.5B | $6.6B | $3.9B | $7.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $588M | $6.9B | $21.0B | $10.2B | $17.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -9.03x | 21.80x | 9.01x | 7.97x | 12.05x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 19.22x | 8.50x | 7.69x | 9.70x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.11x | 0.85x | 0.58x | 0.38x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 16.86x | 14.79x | 11.38x | 9.36x | 10.83x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.21x | 0.74x | 0.18x | 0.21x | 0.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.85x | 2.59x | 1.12x | 1.00x | 3.34x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 4.37x | 9.65x | 34.61x | 6.71x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
TITN leads this category, winning 4 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 $-9 for TITN. TITN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.20x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AN's 4.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TITN scores 6/9 vs AN's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -9.0% | +12.0% | +10.6% | +14.1% | +28.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -3.1% | +5.7% | +2.9% | +4.4% | +4.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.2% | +8.2% | +5.2% | +8.0% | +8.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.3% | +13.3% | +8.2% | +12.8% | +17.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.20x | 0.70x | 2.22x | 1.63x | 4.35x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $86M | $1.3B | $14.3B | $6.3B | $10.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $28M | $213M | $342M | $40M | $59M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $114M | $1.6B | $14.7B | $6.3B | $10.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.06x | 8.49x | 2.34x | 3.15x | 4.53x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RUSHA leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RUSHA five years ago would be worth $22,522 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,904 for LAD. Over the past 12 months, RUSHA leads with a +50.8% total return vs ABG's -8.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RUSHA at 29.0% vs TITN's -12.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +43.7% | +32.2% | -12.2% | -14.7% | -0.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +21.7% | +50.8% | -0.8% | -8.0% | +16.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -33.7% | +114.8% | +35.9% | -0.8% | +52.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -18.1% | +125.2% | -21.0% | -4.1% | +94.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +89.3% | +812.3% | +264.5% | +251.6% | +324.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -12.8% | +29.0% | +10.8% | -0.3% | +15.1% |
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 0.85 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TITN's 1.59 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RUSHA currently trades 92.6% 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 | 1.59x | 0.98x | 1.09x | 1.04x | 0.85x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $23.41 | $76.99 | $360.56 | $274.50 | $228.92 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.35 | $45.67 | $239.78 | $184.61 | $174.34 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +91.8% | +92.6% | +80.8% | +73.0% | +89.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 63.2 | 52.0 | 60.6 | 44.7 | 53.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 146K | 422K | 313K | 249K | 412K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — RUSHA and LAD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TITN as "Hold", RUSHA as "Hold", LAD as "Buy", ABG as "Hold", AN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 41.4% upside for LAD (target: $412) vs -2.3% for TITN (target: $21). For income investors, RUSHA offers the higher dividend yield at 1.01% vs LAD's 0.75%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $21.00 | $82.00 | $411.67 | $238.00 | $248.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 17 | 17 | 26 | 18 | 34 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.0% | +0.7% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.72 | $2.18 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +3.5% | +14.5% | +2.9% | +11.2% |
RUSHA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). TITN leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
TITN vs RUSHA vs LAD vs ABG vs AN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TITN or RUSHA or LAD or ABG or AN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc.
(ABG) is the stronger pick with 4. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -10. 2% for Titan Machinery Inc. (TITN). 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 Lithia Motors, Inc. (LAD) a "Buy" — based on 26 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 — TITN or RUSHA or LAD or ABG or AN?
On trailing P/E, Asbury Automotive Group, Inc.
(ABG) is the cheapest at 8. 0x versus Rush Enterprises, Inc. at 21. 8x. 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. 31x versus Rush Enterprises, Inc. 's 1. 86x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TITN or RUSHA or LAD or ABG or AN?
Over the past 5 years, Rush Enterprises, Inc.
(RUSHA) delivered a total return of +125. 2%, compared to -21. 0% for Lithia Motors, Inc. (LAD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RUSHA returned +812. 3% versus TITN's +89. 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 — TITN or RUSHA or LAD or ABG or AN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AutoNation, Inc.
(AN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 85β versus Titan Machinery Inc. 's 1. 59β — meaning TITN is approximately 87% more volatile than AN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Titan Machinery Inc. (TITN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 20% versus 4% for AutoNation, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TITN or RUSHA or LAD or ABG or AN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Asbury Automotive Group, Inc.
(ABG) is pulling ahead at 4. 7% versus -10. 2% for Titan Machinery Inc. (TITN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. grew EPS 16. 9% year-over-year, compared to -46. 0% for Titan Machinery 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 — TITN or RUSHA or LAD or ABG or AN?
Rush Enterprises, Inc.
(RUSHA) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 5% net margin versus -2. 2% for Titan Machinery 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 -0. 1% for TITN. 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 TITN or RUSHA or LAD or ABG or AN 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 Rush Enterprises, Inc. 's 1. 86x. 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. 2x for Rush Enterprises, Inc. — 11. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LAD: 41. 4% to $411. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — TITN or RUSHA or LAD or ABG or AN?
In this comparison, RUSHA (1.
0% yield), LAD (0. 7% yield) pay a dividend. TITN, ABG, AN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TITN or RUSHA or LAD or ABG or AN 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, +812. 3% 10Y return). Titan Machinery Inc. (TITN) carries a higher beta of 1. 59 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (RUSHA: +812. 3%, TITN: +89. 3%), 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 TITN and RUSHA and LAD and ABG and AN?
These companies operate in different sectors (TITN (Industrials) and RUSHA (Consumer Cyclical) and LAD (Consumer Cyclical) and ABG (Consumer Cyclical) and AN (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TITN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RUSHA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LAD is a small-cap deep-value stock; ABG is a small-cap deep-value stock; AN is a small-cap deep-value stock. RUSHA, LAD pay a dividend while TITN, ABG, 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.