Marine Shipping
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ZIM vs MATX vs SBLK vs UPS vs FDX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Marine Shipping
Marine Shipping
Integrated Freight & Logistics
Integrated Freight & Logistics
ZIM vs MATX vs SBLK vs UPS vs FDX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Marine Shipping | Marine Shipping | Marine Shipping | Integrated Freight & Logistics | Integrated Freight & Logistics |
| Market Cap | $3.21B | $5.56B | $3.10B | $85.63B | $89.01B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.90B | $3.32B | $1.04B | $88.33B | $91.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $479M | $429M | $84M | $5.25B | $4.48B |
| Gross Margin | 16.8% | 18.4% | 33.0% | 18.1% | 24.4% |
| Operating Margin | 12.3% | 13.6% | 13.6% | 8.6% | 6.5% |
| Forward P/E | 6.7x | 13.1x | 7.2x | 14.2x | 19.1x |
| Total Debt | $5.74B | $727M | $1.07B | $32.29B | $37.42B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.05B | $142M | $500M | $5.89B | $5.50B |
ZIM vs MATX vs SBLK vs UPS vs FDX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| ZIM Integrated Ship… (ZIM) | 100 | 220.8 | +120.8% |
| Matson, Inc. (MATX) | 100 | 305.6 | +205.6% |
| Star Bulk Carriers … (SBLK) | 100 | 252.9 | +152.9% |
| United Parcel Servi… (UPS) | 100 | 65.0 | -35.0% |
| FedEx Corporation (FDX) | 100 | 160.9 | +60.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ZIM vs MATX vs SBLK vs UPS vs FDX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ZIM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and dividends.
- Lower P/E (6.7x vs 19.1x)
- 16.1% yield, vs UPS's 6.3%
- +100.7% vs UPS's +10.7%
MATX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 12.9% margin vs FDX's 4.9%
- 9.3% ROA vs SBLK's 2.2%, ROIC 10.8% vs 3.2%
SBLK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 9.8% 10Y total return vs ZIM's 5.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.74, Low D/E 43.8%, current ratio 1.78x
- PEG 0.15 vs FDX's 0.68
- Beta 0.74, yield 1.1%, current ratio 1.78x
UPS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 16 yrs, beta 0.92, yield 6.3%
FDX is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 0.3%, EPS growth -2.3%, 3Y rev CAGR -2.0%
- 0.3% revenue growth vs ZIM's -18.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 0.3% revenue growth vs ZIM's -18.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.7x vs 19.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 12.9% margin vs FDX's 4.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.74 vs MATX's 1.65 | |
| Dividends | 16.1% yield, vs UPS's 6.3% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.7% vs UPS's +10.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.3% ROA vs SBLK's 2.2%, ROIC 10.8% vs 3.2% |
ZIM vs MATX vs SBLK vs UPS vs FDX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ZIM vs MATX vs SBLK vs UPS vs FDX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MATX leads in 2 of 6 categories
ZIM leads 1 • SBLK leads 1 • UPS leads 0 • FDX leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — MATX and SBLK each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FDX is the larger business by revenue, generating $91.9B annually — 88.2x SBLK's $1.0B. MATX is the more profitable business, keeping 12.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FDX's 4.9%. On growth, FDX holds the edge at +8.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6.9B | $3.3B | $1.0B | $88.3B | $91.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.1B | $644M | $311M | $10.5B | $10.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $479M | $429M | $84M | $5.2B | $4.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $2.0B | $418M | $209M | $4.5B | $4.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +16.8% | +18.4% | +33.0% | +18.1% | +24.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +12.3% | +13.6% | +13.6% | +8.6% | +6.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.9% | +12.9% | +8.1% | +5.9% | +4.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +29.0% | +12.6% | +20.0% | +5.1% | +4.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -31.5% | -3.1% | -2.7% | -1.6% | +8.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -93.1% | -15.1% | +58.3% | -27.1% | +15.7% |
Valuation Metrics
ZIM leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.7x trailing earnings, ZIM trades at a 82% valuation discount to SBLK's 36.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), UPS offers better value at 0.46x vs FDX's 0.81x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.2B | $5.6B | $3.1B | $85.6B | $89.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $7.9B | $6.1B | $3.7B | $112.0B | $120.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 6.69x | 13.17x | 36.75x | 15.36x | 22.52x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 13.07x | 7.17x | 14.23x | 19.15x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.51x | 0.75x | 0.46x | 0.81x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 3.70x | 7.72x | 11.88x | 9.17x | 11.69x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.46x | 1.66x | 2.97x | 0.97x | 1.01x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.80x | 2.06x | 1.26x | 5.27x | 3.28x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 1.99x | 36.16x | 14.74x | 17.97x | 29.86x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MATX leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
UPS delivers a 33.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $3 for SBLK. MATX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.26x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to UPS's 1.99x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MATX scores 5/9 vs ZIM's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +12.0% | +15.9% | +3.4% | +33.0% | +15.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.3% | +9.3% | +2.2% | +7.3% | +5.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.3% | +10.8% | +3.2% | +16.1% | +7.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.6% | +11.3% | +4.0% | +15.3% | +8.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.43x | 0.26x | 0.44x | 1.99x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.7B | $585M | $572M | $26.4B | $31.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.1B | $142M | $500M | $5.9B | $5.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.7B | $727M | $1.1B | $32.3B | $37.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.02x | 127.63x | 2.08x | 7.37x | 16.50x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MATX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MATX five years ago would be worth $29,394 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,067 for UPS. Over the past 12 months, ZIM leads with a +100.7% total return vs UPS's +10.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MATX at 41.2% vs UPS's -11.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +25.5% | +48.3% | +40.4% | +1.4% | +29.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +100.7% | +85.9% | +79.2% | +10.7% | +75.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +107.4% | +181.6% | +60.7% | -31.0% | +71.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +94.4% | +193.9% | +82.4% | -39.3% | +30.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +552.4% | +484.2% | +977.9% | +45.4% | +155.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +27.5% | +41.2% | +17.1% | -11.6% | +19.6% |
Risk & Volatility
SBLK leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SBLK is the less volatile stock with a 0.74 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MATX's 1.65 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SBLK currently trades 98.6% from its 52-week high vs UPS's 82.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.27x | 1.65x | 0.74x | 0.92x | 1.03x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $29.97 | $189.28 | $27.20 | $122.41 | $404.03 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $12.33 | $86.97 | $14.85 | $82.00 | $214.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +88.8% | +96.5% | +98.6% | +82.3% | +93.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.7 | 58.8 | 71.5 | 44.4 | 49.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.8M | 269K | 1.4M | 5.8M | 1.8M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ZIM and UPS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ZIM as "Hold", MATX as "Buy", SBLK as "Buy", UPS as "Hold", FDX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 14.3% upside for UPS (target: $115) vs -44.4% for ZIM (target: $15). For income investors, ZIM offers the higher dividend yield at 16.08% vs MATX's 0.79%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $14.80 | $190.00 | $29.00 | $115.23 | $364.19 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 6 | 11 | 24 | 45 | 49 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +16.1% | +0.8% | +1.1% | +6.3% | +1.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 12 | 0 | 16 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $4.28 | $1.44 | $0.30 | $6.35 | $5.51 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +5.5% | +3.2% | +1.2% | +3.4% |
MATX leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). ZIM leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
ZIM vs MATX vs SBLK vs UPS vs FDX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ZIM or MATX or SBLK or UPS or FDX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, FedEx Corporation (FDX) is the stronger pick with 0.
3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -18. 1% for ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd. (ZIM). ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd. (ZIM) offers the better valuation at 6. 7x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Matson, Inc. (MATX) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — ZIM or MATX or SBLK or UPS or FDX?
On trailing P/E, ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd.
(ZIM) is the cheapest at 6. 7x versus Star Bulk Carriers Corp. at 36. 8x. On forward P/E, Star Bulk Carriers Corp. is actually cheaper at 7. 2x — 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: Star Bulk Carriers Corp. wins at 0. 15x versus FedEx Corporation's 0. 68x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ZIM or MATX or SBLK or UPS or FDX?
Over the past 5 years, Matson, Inc.
(MATX) delivered a total return of +193. 9%, compared to -39. 3% for United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SBLK returned +977. 9% versus UPS's +45. 4%. 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 — ZIM or MATX or SBLK or UPS or FDX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Star Bulk Carriers Corp.
(SBLK) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 74β versus Matson, Inc. 's 1. 65β — meaning MATX is approximately 123% more volatile than SBLK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Matson, Inc. (MATX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 26% versus 199% for United Parcel Service, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ZIM or MATX or SBLK or UPS or FDX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), FedEx Corporation (FDX) is pulling ahead at 0.
3% versus -18. 1% for ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd. (ZIM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Matson, Inc. grew EPS -0. 4% year-over-year, compared to -77. 7% for ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FDX leads at -2. 0% 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 — ZIM or MATX or SBLK or UPS or FDX?
Matson, Inc.
(MATX) is the more profitable company, earning 13. 3% net margin versus 4. 7% for FedEx Corporation — meaning it keeps 13. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MATX leads at 14. 0% versus 6. 9% for FDX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MATX leads at 22. 8%, 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 ZIM or MATX or SBLK or UPS or FDX 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, Star Bulk Carriers Corp. (SBLK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 15x versus FedEx Corporation's 0. 68x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Star Bulk Carriers Corp. (SBLK) trades at 7. 2x forward P/E versus 19. 1x for FedEx Corporation — 12. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UPS: 14. 3% to $115. 23.
08Which pays a better dividend — ZIM or MATX or SBLK or UPS or FDX?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd. (ZIM) offers the highest yield at 16. 1%, versus 0. 8% for Matson, Inc. (MATX).
09Is ZIM or MATX or SBLK or UPS or FDX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Star Bulk Carriers Corp.
(SBLK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 74), 1. 1% yield, +977. 9% 10Y return). Matson, Inc. (MATX) carries a higher beta of 1. 65 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SBLK: +977. 9%, MATX: +484. 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 ZIM and MATX and SBLK and UPS and FDX?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: ZIM is a small-cap deep-value stock; MATX is a small-cap deep-value stock; SBLK is a small-cap quality compounder stock; UPS is a mid-cap deep-value stock; FDX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. 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.