Agricultural - Machinery
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
WNC vs WLFC vs GNSS vs THR vs ELME
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Rental & Leasing Services
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Industrial - Machinery
REIT - Office
WNC vs WLFC vs GNSS vs THR vs ELME — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Agricultural - Machinery | Rental & Leasing Services | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Industrial - Machinery | REIT - Office |
| Market Cap | $317M | $1.71B | $90M | $2.15B | $188M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.47B | $763M | $51M | $522M | $0.00 |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-65M | $121M | $-15M | $59M | $-154M |
| Gross Margin | 2.0% | 53.9% | 43.2% | 44.8% | — |
| Operating Margin | -3.1% | 20.4% | -22.1% | 15.9% | — |
| Forward P/E | 1.5x | 16.3x | — | 30.8x | — |
| Total Debt | $443M | $2.71B | $21M | $152M | $520M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $32M | $16M | $8M | $40M | $1.33B |
WNC vs WLFC vs GNSS vs THR vs ELME — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wabash National Cor… (WNC) | 100 | 81.7 | -18.3% |
| Willis Lease Financ… (WLFC) | 100 | 1069.6 | +969.6% |
| Genasys Inc. (GNSS) | 100 | 43.7 | -56.3% |
| Thermon Group Holdi… (THR) | 100 | 407.5 | +307.5% |
| Elme Communities (ELME) | 100 | 9.7 | -90.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: WNC vs WLFC vs GNSS vs THR vs ELME
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
WNC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (1.5x vs 30.8x)
WLFC is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 8.8% 10Y total return vs THR's 251.9%
- PEG 0.23 vs THR's 0.90
- 15.8% margin vs GNSS's -29.2%
GNSS is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 69.8%, EPS growth 44.4%, 3Y rev CAGR -9.0%
- 69.8% revenue growth vs ELME's -100.0%
THR has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.49, Low D/E 30.6%, current ratio 2.43x
- +136.2% vs WNC's +0.4%
- 7.2% ROA vs GNSS's -22.0%, ROIC 9.8% vs -56.7%
ELME is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.47, yield 34.1%
- Beta 0.47, yield 34.1%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.47 vs WNC's 1.93
- 34.1% yield, vs WLFC's 0.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 69.8% revenue growth vs ELME's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.5x vs 30.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.8% margin vs GNSS's -29.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.47 vs WNC's 1.93 | |
| Dividends | 34.1% yield, vs WLFC's 0.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +136.2% vs WNC's +0.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.2% ROA vs GNSS's -22.0%, ROIC 9.8% vs -56.7% |
WNC vs WLFC vs GNSS vs THR vs ELME — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
WNC vs WLFC vs GNSS vs THR vs ELME — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
WLFC leads in 2 of 6 categories
THR leads 1 • WNC leads 0 • GNSS leads 0 • ELME leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WLFC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WNC and ELME operate at a comparable scale, with $1.5B and $0 in trailing revenue. WLFC is the more profitable business, keeping 15.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GNSS's -29.2%. On growth, GNSS holds the edge at +145.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.5B | $763M | $51M | $522M | $0 |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | $273M | -$9M | $106M | -$44M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$65M | $121M | -$15M | $59M | -$154M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$38M | -$277M | -$3M | $55M | $62M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +2.0% | +53.9% | +43.2% | +44.8% | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -3.1% | +20.4% | -22.1% | +15.9% | — |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.4% | +15.8% | -29.2% | +11.3% | — |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.6% | -36.2% | -5.3% | +10.5% | — |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -20.4% | +23.2% | +145.9% | +9.6% | -4.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -120.7% | +57.9% | +78.0% | +1.9% | -6.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — WNC and WLFC and ELME each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 1.5x trailing earnings, WNC trades at a 96% valuation discount to THR's 41.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), WLFC offers better value at 0.21x vs THR's 1.21x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $317M | $1.7B | $90M | $2.1B | $188M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $728M | $4.4B | $104M | $2.3B | -$624M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 1.54x | 14.65x | -5.00x | 41.61x | -1.21x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 16.27x | — | 30.78x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.21x | — | 1.21x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 1.92x | 13.38x | — | 22.11x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.21x | 2.54x | 2.22x | 4.31x | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.88x | 2.18x | 41.58x | 4.49x | 0.78x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 40.58x | 3.03x |
Profitability & Efficiency
THR leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
WLFC delivers a 17.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $-8 for GNSS. THR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.31x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GNSS's 9.85x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), THR scores 7/9 vs GNSS's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -17.3% | +17.1% | -8.2% | +10.9% | -18.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.0% | +3.2% | -22.0% | +7.2% | -8.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +37.4% | +5.3% | -56.7% | +9.8% | -15.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +32.6% | +6.2% | -68.2% | +12.3% | -10.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.20x | 3.74x | 9.85x | 0.31x | 2.18x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $411M | $2.7B | $13M | $112M | -$812M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $32M | $16M | $8M | $40M | $1.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $443M | $2.7B | $21M | $152M | $520M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.97x | 1.79x | -31.66x | 10.25x | -3.82x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WLFC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in WLFC five years ago would be worth $54,075 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,328 for GNSS. Over the past 12 months, THR leads with a +136.2% total return vs WNC's +0.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WLFC at 64.4% vs WNC's -28.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -11.0% | +68.4% | -8.3% | +73.6% | -4.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +0.4% | +68.2% | +2.6% | +136.2% | +8.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -63.9% | +344.6% | -31.3% | +209.1% | +13.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -48.5% | +440.7% | -66.7% | +228.9% | -15.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -22.6% | +879.9% | +14.9% | +251.9% | -11.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -28.8% | +64.4% | -11.8% | +45.7% | +4.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — WLFC and ELME each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ELME is the less volatile stock with a 0.47 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than WNC's 1.93 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WLFC currently trades 94.2% from its 52-week high vs ELME's 12.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.93x | 1.66x | 0.87x | 1.49x | 0.47x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.94 | $239.44 | $2.70 | $71.24 | $17.68 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.10 | $114.01 | $1.40 | $23.86 | $1.98 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +60.3% | +94.2% | +74.1% | +91.7% | +12.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.7 | 75.6 | 59.9 | 77.2 | 50.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 598K | 76K | 95K | 553K | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — THR and ELME each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: WNC as "Hold", WLFC as "Buy", THR as "Buy", ELME as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 796.2% upside for ELME (target: $19) vs -12.7% for THR (target: $57). For income investors, ELME offers the higher dividend yield at 34.11% vs WLFC's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | — | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $17.50 | — | — | $57.00 | $19.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 18 | 1 | — | 15 | 8 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +4.2% | +0.4% | — | — | +34.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.33 | $0.81 | — | — | $0.72 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +10.6% | +0.2% | 0.0% | +1.1% | 0.0% |
WLFC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). THR leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
WNC vs WLFC vs GNSS vs THR vs ELME: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is WNC or WLFC or GNSS or THR or ELME a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Genasys Inc.
(GNSS) is the stronger pick with 69. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Elme Communities (ELME). Wabash National Corporation (WNC) offers the better valuation at 1. 5x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Willis Lease Finance Corporation (WLFC) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — WNC or WLFC or GNSS or THR or ELME?
On trailing P/E, Wabash National Corporation (WNC) is the cheapest at 1.
5x versus Thermon Group Holdings, Inc. at 41. 6x. On forward P/E, Willis Lease Finance Corporation is actually cheaper at 16. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Willis Lease Finance Corporation wins at 0. 23x versus Thermon Group Holdings, Inc. 's 0. 90x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — WNC or WLFC or GNSS or THR or ELME?
Over the past 5 years, Willis Lease Finance Corporation (WLFC) delivered a total return of +440.
7%, compared to -66. 7% for Genasys Inc. (GNSS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WLFC returned +879. 9% versus WNC's -22. 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 — WNC or WLFC or GNSS or THR or ELME?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Elme Communities (ELME) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
47β versus Wabash National Corporation's 1. 93β — meaning WNC is approximately 312% more volatile than ELME relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Thermon Group Holdings, Inc. (THR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 31% versus 10% for Genasys Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — WNC or WLFC or GNSS or THR or ELME?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Genasys Inc.
(GNSS) is pulling ahead at 69. 8% versus -100. 0% for Elme Communities (ELME). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Wabash National Corporation grew EPS 179. 2% year-over-year, compared to -1066. 7% for Elme Communities. Over a 3-year CAGR, WLFC leads at 29. 4% 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 — WNC or WLFC or GNSS or THR or ELME?
Willis Lease Finance Corporation (WLFC) is the more profitable company, earning 16.
8% net margin versus -44. 4% for Genasys Inc. — meaning it keeps 16. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WLFC leads at 32. 3% versus -41. 2% for GNSS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WLFC leads at 65. 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 WNC or WLFC or GNSS or THR or ELME 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, Willis Lease Finance Corporation (WLFC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 23x versus Thermon Group Holdings, Inc. 's 0. 90x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Willis Lease Finance Corporation (WLFC) trades at 16. 3x forward P/E versus 30. 8x for Thermon Group Holdings, Inc. — 14. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ELME: 796. 2% to $19. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — WNC or WLFC or GNSS or THR or ELME?
In this comparison, ELME (34.
1% yield), WNC (4. 2% yield), WLFC (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. GNSS, THR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is WNC or WLFC or GNSS or THR or ELME better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Elme Communities (ELME) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
47), 34. 1% yield). Wabash National Corporation (WNC) carries a higher beta of 1. 93 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ELME: -11. 6%, WNC: -22. 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 WNC and WLFC and GNSS and THR and ELME?
These companies operate in different sectors (WNC (Industrials) and WLFC (Industrials) and GNSS (Technology) and THR (Industrials) and ELME (Real Estate)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: WNC is a small-cap deep-value stock; WLFC is a small-cap high-growth stock; GNSS is a small-cap high-growth stock; THR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ELME is a small-cap income-oriented stock. WNC, ELME pay a dividend while WLFC, GNSS, THR 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.