EZPW
Price
$32.67
Change
-$1.40 (-4.11%)
Updated
Jul 13 closing price
Capitalization
2.01B
22 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
FCFS
Price
$214.62
Change
-$3.99 (-1.83%)
Updated
Jul 13 closing price
Capitalization
9.42B
9 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
Jul 14, 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 Buy and FCFS is a StrongBuy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 14, 2026
Stock price -- (EZPW: $32.67 vs. FCFS: $214.62)
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: 35% vs. FCFS: 26%
Market capitalization -- EZPW: $2.01B vs. FCFS: $9.42B
EZPW [@Savings Banks] is valued at $2.01B. FCFS’s [@Savings Banks] market capitalization is $9.42B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Savings Banks] industry ranges from $680.35B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Savings Banks] industry is $33.36B.

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.
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 3 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • EZPW’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
  • FCFS’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, EZPW is a better buy in the short-term than FCFS.

Price Growth

EZPW (@Savings Banks) experienced а -7.37% price change this week, while FCFS (@Savings Banks) price change was -4.31% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Savings Banks industry was -3.70%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.37%, and the average quarterly price growth was -1.47%.

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 (-3.70% 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($9.42B) has a higher market cap than EZPW($2.01B). FCFS has higher P/E ratio than EZPW: FCFS (26.92) vs EZPW (17.65). EZPW YTD gains are higher at: 68.229 vs. FCFS (35.217). FCFS has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 1.04B vs. EZPW (263M). EZPW has more cash in the bank: 354M vs. FCFS (131M). EZPW has less debt than FCFS: EZPW (799M) vs FCFS (2.61B). FCFS has higher revenues than EZPW: FCFS (3.88B) vs EZPW (1.48B).
EZPWFCFSEZPW / FCFS
Capitalization2.01B9.42B21%
EBITDA263M1.04B25%
Gain YTD68.22935.217194%
P/E Ratio17.6526.9266%
Revenue1.48B3.88B38%
Total Cash354M131M270%
Total Debt799M2.61B31%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
EZPW vs FCFS: Fundamental Ratings
EZPW
FCFS
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
2316
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
78
Overvalued
94
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
33
SMR RATING
1..100
5853
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3741
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
1927
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
3890

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 (78) 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 (3) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as FCFS (3). This means that EZPW’s stock grew similarly to FCFS’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 (58). This means that FCFS’s stock grew similarly to EZPW’s over the last 12 months.

EZPW's Price Growth Rating (37) 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 (19) in the Finance Or Rental Or Leasing industry is in the same range as FCFS (27). 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
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
61%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
69%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
75%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
67%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
67%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
50%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
57%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
54%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
73%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
48%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
74%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
67%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 27 days ago
57%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
57%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
69%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
71%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
64%
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 %
FTDS62.41N/A
N/A
First Trust Dividend Strength ETF
FDIQ68.36N/A
N/A
Invesco Bloomberg Fincl Dt Prvdrs ETF
MTBA48.80-0.12
-0.26%
Simplify MBS ETF
GQI59.43-0.22
-0.37%
Natixis Gateway Quality Income ETF
FGSM34.40-0.25
-0.71%
Frontier Asset Global Small-Cap Equity 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.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To EZPW
1D Price
Change %
EZPW100%
-4.11%
FCFS - EZPW
59%
Loosely correlated
-1.83%
UPBD - EZPW
38%
Loosely correlated
-0.05%
OPRT - EZPW
29%
Poorly correlated
-4.99%
ALLY - EZPW
28%
Poorly correlated
-1.03%
SYF - EZPW
28%
Poorly correlated
+1.06%
More