EZPW
Price
$30.02
Change
+$0.24 (+0.81%)
Updated
Aug 3, 12:32 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
1.83B
2 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
FCFS
Price
$204.01
Change
+$2.07 (+1.03%)
Updated
Jul 31 closing price
Capitalization
8.85B
80 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

EZPW vs FCFS

EZPW vs FCFS Comparison Chart in %
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
EZPW vs. FCFS commentary
Aug 03, 2026

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 StrongBuy and FCFS is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 03, 2026
Stock price -- (EZPW: $29.77 vs. FCFS: $204.01)
Brand notoriety: EZPW and FCFS are both not notable
Both companies represent the Savings Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: EZPW: 41% vs. FCFS: 44%
Market capitalization -- EZPW: $1.83B vs. FCFS: $8.85B
EZPW [@Savings Banks] is valued at $1.83B. FCFS’s [@Savings Banks] market capitalization is $8.85B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Savings Banks] industry ranges from $677.86B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Savings Banks] industry is $33.61B.

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 1 green FA rating(s).

  • EZPW’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • FCFS’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, both EZPW and FCFS are a good buy in the long-term.

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 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while FCFS’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • EZPW’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
  • FCFS’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, FCFS is a better buy in the short-term than EZPW.

Price Growth

EZPW (@Savings Banks) experienced а +0.78% price change this week, while FCFS (@Savings Banks) price change was +4.59% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Savings Banks industry was +1.01%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -4.61%, and the average quarterly price growth was +6.09%.

Reported Earning Dates

EZPW is expected to report earnings on Aug 05, 2026.

FCFS is expected to report earnings on Oct 22, 2026.

Industries' Descriptions

@Savings Banks (+1.01% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
FCFS($8.85B) has a higher market cap than EZPW($1.83B). FCFS has higher P/E ratio than EZPW: FCFS (23.21) vs EZPW (16.09). EZPW YTD gains are higher at: 53.296 vs. FCFS (28.533). FCFS has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 1.09B vs. EZPW (263M). EZPW has more cash in the bank: 354M vs. FCFS (172M). EZPW has less debt than FCFS: EZPW (799M) vs FCFS (2.7B). FCFS has higher revenues than EZPW: FCFS (4.12B) vs EZPW (1.48B).
EZPWFCFSEZPW / FCFS
Capitalization1.83B8.85B21%
EBITDA263M1.09B24%
Gain YTD53.29628.533187%
P/E Ratio16.0923.2169%
Revenue1.48B4.12B36%
Total Cash354M172M206%
Total Debt799M2.7B30%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
EZPW vs FCFS: Fundamental Ratings
EZPW
FCFS
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
7760
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
69
Overvalued
94
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
67
SMR RATING
1..100
5851
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4347
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
1835
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5050

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 (69) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as FCFS (94). This means that EZPW’s stock grew similarly to FCFS’s over the last 12 months.

EZPW's Profit vs Risk Rating (6) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as FCFS (7). This means that EZPW’s stock grew similarly to FCFS’s over the last 12 months.

FCFS's SMR Rating (51) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as EZPW (58). This means that FCFS’s stock grew similarly to EZPW’s over the last 12 months.

EZPW's Price Growth Rating (43) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as FCFS (47). 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 (35). This means that EZPW’s stock grew similarly to FCFS’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
EZPWFCFS
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
81%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
76%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
70%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
58%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
54%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
61%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
55%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
74%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
68%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
54%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
49%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
75%
Bullish Trend 19 days ago
66%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
57%
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
58%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
77%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
74%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
59%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
28%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
EZPW
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
FCFS
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
PATX10.180.55
+5.71%
Tradr 2X Long PATH Daily ETF
QMNV24.980.10
+0.42%
FT Vest Nasdaq-100® Mod Buffr ETF – Nov
BTR27.68N/A
N/A
Beacon Tactical Risk ETF
RYLD16.01-0.03
-0.19%
Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF
MUSI43.12-0.10
-0.24%
American Century Multisector Income ETF

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.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FCFS
1D Price
Change %
FCFS100%
+1.03%
EZPW - FCFS
52%
Loosely correlated
+2.09%
UPBD - FCFS
43%
Loosely correlated
-3.63%
BBDC - FCFS
34%
Loosely correlated
-0.12%
R - FCFS
30%
Poorly correlated
-0.68%
CTOS - FCFS
29%
Poorly correlated
+2.32%
More