Advertisement
EZPW vs FCFS
Which Stock Would AI Choose? EZCORP (EZPW) vs. FirstCash Holdings (FCFS) Stock Comparison
Key Takeaways
- EZPW has delivered stronger year-to-date returns of approximately 65% compared to FCFS's 34%, reflecting robust momentum in recent market activity.
- Both companies operate in the pawn services sector, benefiting from high gold prices and demand for short-term loans, but EZPW's smaller market cap of $1.98B allows for higher volatility and growth potential versus FCFS's $9B scale.
- Recent quarterly results show beats for both: EZPW on Q1 2026 earnings and FCFS on Q1 with EPS of $2.69 and revenue up 26% YoY.
- FCFS offers a dividend yield with a recent $0.42 payout, appealing to income-focused investors, while EZPW emphasizes share buybacks.
- Tickeron's analysis rates EZPW as a Strong Buy and FCFS as a Hold, highlighting relative trend strength.
Introduction
EZCORP (EZPW) and FirstCash Holdings (FCFS) are leading players in the pawn and consumer finance sector, offering pawn loans secured by personal property and retailing forfeited merchandise. This comparison is particularly relevant for traders seeking momentum plays and investors eyeing non-traditional financial services amid volatile economic conditions. Both stocks have shown resilience in recent weeks, driven by elevated precious metal prices and steady demand for alternative lending. Understanding their relative performance, business models, and market positioning can help inform decisions in a sector sensitive to interest rates and consumer spending trends.
EZPW Overview and Recent Performance
EZCORP, Inc. operates pawn stores across the U.S., Mexico, and Latin America, providing secured loans and retailing pre-owned goods like jewelry and electronics under brands such as EZPAWN and Empeño Fácil. In recent market activity, EZPW shares have surged, hitting 52-week highs near $32.50 with year-to-date gains exceeding 65% and one-year returns around 96%. This momentum stems from strong quarterly results, including Q1 2026 earnings beats, operational efficiencies, and a new share buyback program, boosting investor sentiment. The stock's low beta of 0.52 indicates relative stability, while a P/E ratio (price-to-earnings) of 20.4 and market cap of $1.98B position it for growth in pawn lending amid rising gold values.
FCFS Overview and Recent Performance
FirstCash Holdings, Inc. is a major operator of pawn stores in the U.S. and Latin America, focusing on pawn loans, retail sales of merchandise, and consumer financial services. Shares of FCFS have advanced steadily, reaching 52-week highs around $227 with year-to-date returns of 34% and one-year gains of 61%. Key drivers include robust Q1 2026 results with EPS of $2.69 beating estimates by 17%, revenue of $1.05B up 26% YoY, and a reaffirmed dividend, supporting positive sentiment. Trading at a P/E around 26 and with a larger $9B market cap, FCFS exhibits solid scale but moderated upside compared to peers in recent weeks.
Trending AI Robots
Tickeron’s Trending AI Robots page showcases the top 25 AI trading bots selected from over 351 total bots that trade thousands of tickers across diverse strategies. These curated bots stand out for their suitability to current market conditions, featuring varying styles such as swing trading, day trading, and long-term holds, with performance stats including win rates often above 60%, average annual returns ranging from 20-100%+, and Sharpe ratios indicating risk-adjusted efficiency. For instance, some bots focus on momentum in financial sectors like pawn stocks, adapting to volatility in gold prices and lending demand. Traders can explore these bots' backtested results, live performances, and ticker lists to enhance strategies. Visit the page to discover bots potentially suited for EZPW or FCFS exposure.
Head-to-Head Comparison
Both EZPW and FCFS thrive on pawn lending and retail in underserved markets, but FCFS's larger footprint provides diversified revenue and stability, while EZPW's agility supports faster growth. Recent momentum favors EZPW with 27% one-month gains versus FCFS's 12%, though FCFS counters with consistent dividends absent in EZPW. Risk factors include economic sensitivity—higher interest rates could curb loan demand—but both benefit from sector tailwinds like gold rallies. Market sentiment leans toward EZPW's undervaluation (analyst targets ~$34) over FCFS's premium valuation, with EZPW showing superior relative performance in recent quarters.
Tickeron AI Verdict
Tickeron’s AI currently favors EZPW over FCFS due to stronger trend consistency, superior YTD and one-year returns, and a Strong Buy rating amid ongoing catalysts like buybacks and earnings momentum. FCFS remains attractive for stability and income, but EZPW's relative positioning suggests higher probability of near-term outperformance in the pawn sector.
Disclaimer
The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer. Disclaimers and Limitations
To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is EZPW is a Buy and FCFS is a Buy.
Long-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).
EZPW’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileFCFS’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- EZPW’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- FCFS’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
Short-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.
If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.
EZPW’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while FCFS’s TA Score has 6 bullish TA indicator(s).
- EZPW’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 6 bearish.
- FCFS’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
EZPW (@Savings Banks) experienced а -2.26% price change this week, while FCFS (@Savings Banks) price change was +2.28% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Savings Banks industry was -0.17%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.44%, and the average quarterly price growth was -4.05%.
Reported Earning Dates
EZPW is expected to report earnings on Aug 05, 2026.
FCFS is expected to report earnings on Jul 23, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Savings Banks (-0.17% weekly)A savings bank primary function is to take deposits and paying interest on those deposits. Originating in Europe during the 18th century, these banks were generally introduced to incentivize people of all stripes to save money and park them with banks. By the 1990s, the internet ushered in online savings banks that allowed savers to deposit/transact with banks digitally, without requiring to visit a branch office. Savings banks have potentially encouraged lower-income population to save and have access to a financial institution to earn interest on their money. New York Community Bancorp, Inc, Webster Financial Corporation, Washington Federal, Inc. are examples of savings banks.
| EZPW | FCFS | EZPW / FCFS | |
| Capitalization | 1.94B | 10B | 19% |
| EBITDA | 263M | 1.04B | 25% |
| Gain YTD | 62.255 | 44.208 | 141% |
| P/E Ratio | 17.03 | 28.68 | 59% |
| Revenue | 1.48B | 3.88B | 38% |
| Total Cash | 354M | 131M | 270% |
| Total Debt | 799M | 2.61B | 31% |
EZPW | FCFS | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 68 | 21 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 80 Overvalued | 97 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 5 | 4 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 57 | 53 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 38 | 41 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 18 | 25 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 21 | 41 |
Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.
EZPW's Valuation (80) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as FCFS (97). This means that EZPW’s stock grew similarly to FCFS’s over the last 12 months.
FCFS's Profit vs Risk Rating (4) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as EZPW (5). This means that FCFS’s stock grew similarly to EZPW’s over the last 12 months.
FCFS's SMR Rating (53) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as EZPW (57). This means that FCFS’s stock grew similarly to EZPW’s over the last 12 months.
EZPW's Price Growth Rating (38) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as FCFS (41). This means that EZPW’s stock grew similarly to FCFS’s over the last 12 months.
EZPW's P/E Growth Rating (18) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as FCFS (25). This means that EZPW’s stock grew similarly to FCFS’s over the last 12 months.
| EZPW | FCFS | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 82% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 54% | 2 days ago 50% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 62% | 2 days ago 67% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 67% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 74% | 2 days ago 70% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 52% | 2 days ago 70% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 75% | 2 days ago 67% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 57% | 8 days ago 57% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 75% | 2 days ago 68% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 41% | 2 days ago 38% |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| FEMS | 47.22 | 0.23 | +0.48% |
| First Trust Emerg Mkts SC AlphaDEX® ETF | |||
| GJO | 24.95 | 0.11 | +0.44% |
| Synthetic Fixed-Income Securities | |||
| SEIV | 47.95 | 0.18 | +0.38% |
| SEI QiM U.S. Lrg Cap Value Actv ETF | |||
| FCO | 2.56 | N/A | N/A |
| abrdn Global Income Fund | |||
| DUKZ | 25.62 | -0.09 | -0.37% |
| Ocean Park Diversified Income ETF | |||
EZPW and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, EZPW has been loosely correlated with FCFS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 59% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if EZPW jumps, then FCFS could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To EZPW | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EZPW | 100% | -0.66% | ||
| FCFS - EZPW | 59% Loosely correlated | +0.81% | ||
| UPBD - EZPW | 38% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| ALLY - EZPW | 29% Poorly correlated | +0.18% | ||
| SYF - EZPW | 29% Poorly correlated | +0.60% | ||
| OPRT - EZPW | 28% Poorly correlated | +4.07% | ||
More | ||||
FCFS and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FCFS has been loosely correlated with EZPW. These tickers have moved in lockstep 52% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if FCFS jumps, then EZPW could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FCFS | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FCFS | 100% | +0.81% | ||
| EZPW - FCFS | 52% Loosely correlated | -0.66% | ||
| UPBD - FCFS | 43% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| BBDC - FCFS | 34% Loosely correlated | -2.41% | ||
| R - FCFS | 30% Poorly correlated | +0.64% | ||
| CTOS - FCFS | 29% Poorly correlated | +1.15% | ||
More | ||||