Software - Application
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
YMM vs CHRW vs UBER vs XPO vs ODFL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Integrated Freight & Logistics
Software - Application
Integrated Freight & Logistics
Trucking
YMM vs CHRW vs UBER vs XPO vs ODFL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Integrated Freight & Logistics | Software - Application | Integrated Freight & Logistics | Trucking |
| Market Cap | $18.78B | $20.33B | $156.29B | $24.00B | $41.34B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $12.14B | $16.20B | $53.69B | $8.30B | $5.50B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $4.18B | $599M | $8.54B | $348M | $1.02B |
| Gross Margin | 71.3% | 8.3% | 41.0% | 12.2% | 32.2% |
| Operating Margin | 32.4% | 4.9% | 11.7% | 9.1% | 24.8% |
| Forward P/E | 1.9x | 27.8x | 23.1x | 41.9x | 37.1x |
| Total Debt | $65M | $1.63B | $13.47B | $4.70B | $141M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5.81B | $161M | $7.74B | $310M | $120M |
YMM vs CHRW vs UBER vs XPO vs ODFL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full Truck Alliance… (YMM) | 100 | 43.2 | -56.8% |
| C.H. Robinson World… (CHRW) | 100 | 183.0 | +83.0% |
| Uber Technologies, … (UBER) | 100 | 150.5 | +50.5% |
| XPO Logistics, Inc. (XPO) | 100 | 422.6 | +322.6% |
| Old Dominion Freigh… (ODFL) | 100 | 156.3 | +56.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: YMM vs CHRW vs UBER vs XPO vs ODFL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
YMM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 33.2%, EPS growth 47.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 34.1%
- 33.2% revenue growth vs CHRW's -8.4%
- Lower P/E (1.9x vs 37.1x)
- 34.4% margin vs CHRW's 3.7%
CHRW is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 5 yrs, beta 0.97, yield 1.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.97, Low D/E 88.3%, current ratio 1.53x
- Beta 0.97, yield 1.4%, current ratio 1.53x
- Beta 0.97 vs XPO's 1.72, lower leverage
UBER lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
XPO is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 21.2% 10Y total return vs CHRW's 163.6%
- PEG 1.52 vs CHRW's 5.19
ODFL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for efficiency.
- 18.5% ROA vs XPO's 4.3%, ROIC 23.6% vs 9.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 33.2% revenue growth vs CHRW's -8.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.9x vs 37.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 34.4% margin vs CHRW's 3.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.97 vs XPO's 1.72, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs ODFL's 0.6%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +94.1% vs YMM's -23.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.5% ROA vs XPO's 4.3%, ROIC 23.6% vs 9.3% |
YMM vs CHRW vs UBER vs XPO vs ODFL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
YMM vs CHRW vs UBER vs XPO vs ODFL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
YMM leads in 1 of 6 categories
XPO leads 1 • CHRW leads 0 • UBER leads 0 • ODFL leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
YMM leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
UBER is the larger business by revenue, generating $53.7B annually — 9.8x ODFL's $5.5B. YMM is the more profitable business, keeping 34.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CHRW's 3.7%. On growth, YMM holds the edge at +17.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $12.1B | $16.2B | $53.7B | $8.3B | $5.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $4.0B | $896M | $7.0B | $1.3B | $1.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $4.2B | $599M | $8.5B | $348M | $1.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | $858M | $9.8B | $457M | $955M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +71.3% | +8.3% | +41.0% | +12.2% | +32.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +32.4% | +4.9% | +11.7% | +9.1% | +24.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +34.4% | +3.7% | +15.9% | +4.2% | +18.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +25.8% | +5.3% | +18.3% | +5.5% | +17.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +17.2% | -0.8% | +14.5% | +7.3% | -5.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +29.4% | +9.9% | -84.3% | +49.1% | -11.4% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — YMM and UBER and XPO each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, UBER trades at a 79% valuation discount to XPO's 77.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), XPO offers better value at 2.80x vs CHRW's 6.62x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $18.8B | $20.3B | $156.3B | $24.0B | $41.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $17.9B | $21.8B | $162.0B | $28.4B | $41.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 20.39x | 35.48x | 15.95x | 77.44x | 41.06x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1.92x | 27.83x | 23.13x | 41.86x | 37.10x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 6.62x | — | 2.80x | 3.66x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 47.80x | 24.28x | 25.67x | 22.72x | 23.97x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 11.37x | 1.25x | 3.00x | 2.94x | 7.52x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.64x | 11.28x | 5.69x | 13.07x | 9.66x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 44.13x | 22.72x | 16.01x | 72.96x | 43.28x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — YMM and ODFL each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CHRW delivers a 33.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $11 for YMM. YMM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to XPO's 2.53x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), YMM scores 8/9 vs XPO's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.9% | +33.3% | +32.0% | +19.0% | +24.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +10.0% | +11.5% | +14.2% | +4.3% | +18.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.0% | +18.0% | +13.6% | +9.3% | +23.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.7% | +25.6% | +12.5% | +11.3% | +27.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.88x | 0.48x | 2.53x | 0.03x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5.7B | $1.5B | $5.7B | $4.4B | $21M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5.8B | $161M | $7.7B | $310M | $120M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $65M | $1.6B | $13.5B | $4.7B | $141M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 6.27x | 11.51x | 3.21x | 4601.85x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
XPO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in XPO five years ago would be worth $39,892 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,293 for YMM. Over the past 12 months, CHRW leads with a +94.1% total return vs YMM's -23.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors XPO at 61.6% vs ODFL's 8.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -20.9% | +5.1% | -8.9% | +47.3% | +24.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -23.0% | +94.1% | -8.3% | +82.4% | +24.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +56.7% | +73.7% | +94.3% | +322.1% | +29.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.1% | +80.1% | +64.8% | +298.9% | +49.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.1% | +163.6% | +81.5% | +2119.8% | +843.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.2% | +20.2% | +24.8% | +61.6% | +8.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CHRW and XPO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CHRW is the less volatile stock with a 0.97 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than XPO's 1.72 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. XPO currently trades 88.3% from its 52-week high vs YMM's 62.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.51x | 0.97x | 1.14x | 1.72x | 1.36x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $14.07 | $203.34 | $101.99 | $231.46 | $233.79 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $8.04 | $87.41 | $68.46 | $109.64 | $126.01 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +62.6% | +84.3% | +74.0% | +88.3% | +84.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.7 | 45.9 | 54.9 | 46.6 | 43.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 6.0M | 1.7M | 15.8M | 1.3M | 2.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — YMM and ODFL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: YMM as "Buy", CHRW as "Hold", UBER as "Buy", XPO as "Buy", ODFL as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 44.9% upside for YMM (target: $13) vs 3.5% for XPO (target: $212). For income investors, YMM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.70% vs ODFL's 0.57%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $12.77 | $187.38 | $103.30 | $211.60 | $208.19 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 3 | 46 | 61 | 32 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.7% | +1.4% | — | — | +0.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 5 | — | 2 | 10 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.02 | $2.48 | — | — | $1.12 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.5% | +1.7% | +4.2% | +0.5% | +1.8% |
YMM leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). XPO leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.
YMM vs CHRW vs UBER vs XPO vs ODFL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is YMM or CHRW or UBER or XPO or ODFL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Full Truck Alliance Co.
Ltd. (YMM) is the stronger pick with 33. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 4% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW). Uber Technologies, Inc. (UBER) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (23. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd. (YMM) a "Buy" — based on 3 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 — YMM or CHRW or UBER or XPO or ODFL?
On trailing P/E, Uber Technologies, Inc.
(UBER) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus XPO Logistics, Inc. at 77. 4x. On forward P/E, Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd. is actually cheaper at 1. 9x — 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: XPO Logistics, Inc. wins at 1. 52x versus C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. 's 5. 19x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — YMM or CHRW or UBER or XPO or ODFL?
Over the past 5 years, XPO Logistics, Inc.
(XPO) delivered a total return of +298. 9%, compared to -57. 1% for Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd. (YMM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: XPO returned +21. 2% versus YMM's -57. 1%. 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 — YMM or CHRW or UBER or XPO or ODFL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), C.
H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 97β versus XPO Logistics, Inc. 's 1. 72β — meaning XPO is approximately 77% more volatile than CHRW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd. (YMM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 3% for XPO Logistics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — YMM or CHRW or UBER or XPO or ODFL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Full Truck Alliance Co.
Ltd. (YMM) is pulling ahead at 33. 2% versus -8. 4% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd. grew EPS 47. 0% year-over-year, compared to -18. 3% for XPO Logistics, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, YMM leads at 34. 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 — YMM or CHRW or UBER or XPO or ODFL?
Full Truck Alliance Co.
Ltd. (YMM) is the more profitable company, earning 27. 3% net margin versus 3. 6% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ODFL leads at 24. 8% versus 4. 9% for CHRW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — YMM leads at 86. 6%, 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 YMM or CHRW or UBER or XPO or ODFL 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, XPO Logistics, Inc. (XPO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 52x versus C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. 's 5. 19x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd. (YMM) trades at 1. 9x forward P/E versus 41. 9x for XPO Logistics, Inc. — 39. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for YMM: 44. 9% to $12. 77.
08Which pays a better dividend — YMM or CHRW or UBER or XPO or ODFL?
In this comparison, YMM (1.
7% yield), CHRW (1. 4% yield), ODFL (0. 6% yield) pay a dividend. UBER, XPO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is YMM or CHRW or UBER or XPO or ODFL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc.
(ODFL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (0. 6% yield, +843. 0% 10Y return). XPO Logistics, Inc. (XPO) carries a higher beta of 1. 72 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ODFL: +843. 0%, XPO: +21. 2%), 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 YMM and CHRW and UBER and XPO and ODFL?
These companies operate in different sectors (YMM (Technology) and CHRW (Industrials) and UBER (Technology) and XPO (Industrials) and ODFL (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: YMM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; CHRW is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; UBER is a mid-cap high-growth stock; XPO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ODFL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. YMM, CHRW, ODFL pay a dividend while UBER, XPO 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.