Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (RUSHA) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Auto - Dealerships Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RUSHA | $67.02 | +1.36% | 5.2B | 20.25 | $3.31 | +1.14% |
| CVNA | $66.51 | +0.48% | 72.1B | 38.66 | $1.72 | N/A |
| PAG | $171.02 | -0.34% | 11.3B | 12.36 | $13.84 | +3.25% |
| KMX | $47.15 | +0.49% | 6.7B | 28.05 | $1.68 | N/A |
| LAD | $288.84 | -0.61% | 6.6B | 10.09 | $28.66 | +0.78% |
| AN | $187.72 | -0.22% | 6.3B | 10.19 | $18.44 | N/A |
| RUSHB | $67.00 | +1.84% | 5.2B | 20.24 | $3.31 | +1.14% |
| OPLN | $36.48 | -0.08% | 3.9B | 81.00 | $0.45 | N/A |
| GPI | $311.00 | +1.82% | 3.7B | 11.83 | $26.32 | +0.68% |
| ABG | $190.98 | +0.44% | 3.6B | 6.75 | $28.29 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
RUSHA vs CVNA Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, CVNA has a market cap of 72.1B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while CVNA trades at $66.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas CVNA's P/E ratio is 38.66. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to CVNA's ROE of +0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to CVNA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check CVNA's competition here
RUSHA vs PAG Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, PAG has a market cap of 11.3B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while PAG trades at $171.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas PAG's P/E ratio is 12.36. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to PAG's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to PAG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check PAG's competition here
RUSHA vs KMX Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, KMX has a market cap of 6.7B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while KMX trades at $47.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas KMX's P/E ratio is 28.05. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to KMX's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to KMX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check KMX's competition here
RUSHA vs LAD Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, LAD has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while LAD trades at $288.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas LAD's P/E ratio is 10.09. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to LAD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to LAD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check LAD's competition here
RUSHA vs AN Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, AN has a market cap of 6.3B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while AN trades at $187.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas AN's P/E ratio is 10.19. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to AN's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to AN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check AN's competition here
RUSHA vs RUSHB Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, RUSHB has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while RUSHB trades at $67.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas RUSHB's P/E ratio is 20.24. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to RUSHB's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to RUSHB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check RUSHB's competition here
RUSHA vs OPLN Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, OPLN has a market cap of 3.9B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while OPLN trades at $36.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas OPLN's P/E ratio is 81.00. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to OPLN's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to OPLN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check OPLN's competition here
RUSHA vs GPI Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, GPI has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while GPI trades at $311.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas GPI's P/E ratio is 11.83. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to GPI's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to GPI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check GPI's competition here
RUSHA vs ABG Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, ABG has a market cap of 3.6B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while ABG trades at $190.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas ABG's P/E ratio is 6.75. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to ABG's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to ABG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check ABG's competition here
RUSHA vs KAR Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, KAR has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while KAR trades at $27.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas KAR's P/E ratio is 31.54. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to KAR's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to KAR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check KAR's competition here
RUSHA vs SAH Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, SAH has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while SAH trades at $82.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas SAH's P/E ratio is 25.93. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to SAH's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to SAH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check SAH's competition here
RUSHA vs CARG Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, CARG has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while CARG trades at $27.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas CARG's P/E ratio is 14.43. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to CARG's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to CARG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check CARG's competition here
RUSHA vs DRVN Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, DRVN has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while DRVN trades at $13.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas DRVN's P/E ratio is 16.22. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to DRVN's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to DRVN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check DRVN's competition here
RUSHA vs ACVA Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, ACVA has a market cap of 988.2M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while ACVA trades at $5.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas ACVA's P/E ratio is -15.72. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to ACVA's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to ACVA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check ACVA's competition here
RUSHA vs UXIN Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, UXIN has a market cap of 441.3M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while UXIN trades at $2.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas UXIN's P/E ratio is -10.20. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to UXIN's ROE of +0.49%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to UXIN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check UXIN's competition here
RUSHA vs CWH Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, CWH has a market cap of 407.8M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while CWH trades at $6.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas CWH's P/E ratio is -4.31. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to CWH's ROE of -0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to CWH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check CWH's competition here
RUSHA vs NWTN Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, NWTN has a market cap of 406.2M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while NWTN trades at $1.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas NWTN's P/E ratio is -2.36. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to NWTN's ROE of -160.20%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to NWTN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check NWTN's competition here
RUSHA vs RDNW Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, RDNW has a market cap of 305.2M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while RDNW trades at $7.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas RDNW's P/E ratio is -6.44. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to RDNW's ROE of -0.61%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to RDNW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check RDNW's competition here
RUSHA vs KFS Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, KFS has a market cap of 292.8M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while KFS trades at $10.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas KFS's P/E ratio is -25.57. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to KFS's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to KFS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check KFS's competition here
RUSHA vs RMBL Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, RMBL has a market cap of 140.3M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while RMBL trades at $3.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas RMBL's P/E ratio is -1.23. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to RMBL's ROE of -0.61%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to RMBL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check RMBL's competition here
RUSHA vs CANG Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, CANG has a market cap of 132M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while CANG trades at $0.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas CANG's P/E ratio is -0.15. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to CANG's ROE of -1.17%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to CANG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check CANG's competition here
RUSHA vs SDA Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, SDA has a market cap of 117.3M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while SDA trades at $1.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas SDA's P/E ratio is -23.00. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to SDA's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to SDA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check SDA's competition here
RUSHA vs LAZY Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, LAZY has a market cap of 77.1M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while LAZY trades at $5.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas LAZY's P/E ratio is -9.89. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to LAZY's ROE of -4.64%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to LAZY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check LAZY's competition here
RUSHA vs OTH Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, OTH has a market cap of 64.2M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while OTH trades at $2.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas OTH's P/E ratio is -11.17. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to OTH's ROE of -1.02%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to OTH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check OTH's competition here
RUSHA vs CRMT Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, CRMT has a market cap of 64.2M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while CRMT trades at $7.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas CRMT's P/E ratio is -0.69. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to CRMT's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to CRMT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check CRMT's competition here
RUSHA vs VRM Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, VRM has a market cap of 47.9M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while VRM trades at $9.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas VRM's P/E ratio is -0.71. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to VRM's ROE of -0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to VRM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check VRM's competition here
RUSHA vs CZOO Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, CZOO has a market cap of 29.5M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while CZOO trades at $6.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas CZOO's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to CZOO's ROE of -1.56%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to CZOO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check CZOO's competition here
RUSHA vs NWTNW Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, NWTNW has a market cap of 12.4M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while NWTNW trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas NWTNW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to NWTNW's ROE of +1.92%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to NWTNW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check NWTNW's competition here
RUSHA vs AZI Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, AZI has a market cap of 4.6M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while AZI trades at $1.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas AZI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to AZI's ROE of +1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to AZI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check AZI's competition here
RUSHA vs SFT Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, SFT has a market cap of 2.9M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while SFT trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas SFT's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to SFT's ROE of -22.22%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to SFT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check SFT's competition here
RUSHA vs JZXN Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, JZXN has a market cap of 1.6M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while JZXN trades at $1.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas JZXN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to JZXN's ROE of -0.94%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to JZXN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check JZXN's competition here
RUSHA vs GORV Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, GORV has a market cap of 1.6M. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while GORV trades at $0.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas GORV's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to GORV's ROE of -4.26%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to GORV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check GORV's competition here
RUSHA vs LMPX Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, LMPX has a market cap of 763.6K. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while LMPX trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas LMPX's P/E ratio is -0.17. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to LMPX's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to LMPX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check LMPX's competition here
RUSHA vs KXIN Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, KXIN has a market cap of 155.3K. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while KXIN trades at $5.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas KXIN's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to KXIN's ROE of -4.98%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to KXIN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check KXIN's competition here
RUSHA vs UCAR Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, UCAR has a market cap of 59.7K. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while UCAR trades at $1.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas UCAR's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to UCAR's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is more volatile compared to UCAR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check UCAR's competition here
RUSHA vs CTNT Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, CTNT has a market cap of 28.7K. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while CTNT trades at $1.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas CTNT's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to CTNT's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to CTNT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check CTNT's competition here
RUSHA vs LOTZW Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, LOTZW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while LOTZW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas LOTZW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to LOTZW's ROE of +6.12%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to LOTZW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check LOTZW's competition here
RUSHA vs LOTZ Comparison June 2026
RUSHA plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, RUSHA stands at 5.2B. In comparison, LOTZ has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, RUSHA is priced at $67.02, while LOTZ trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
RUSHA currently has a P/E ratio of 20.25, whereas LOTZ's P/E ratio is -0.34. In terms of profitability, RUSHA's ROE is +0.12%, compared to LOTZ's ROE of +6.12%. Regarding short-term risk, RUSHA is less volatile compared to LOTZ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for RUSHA.Check LOTZ's competition here