Restore (RST) Competitors

21.6% of Restore shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 27.1% of Capita shares are held by institutional investors. 15.9% of Restore shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 13.4% of Capita shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, large money managers and endowments believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

In the previous week, Restore had 5 more articles in the media than Capita. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Restore and 0 mentions for Capita. Capita's average media sentiment score of 0.25 beat Restore's score of 0.14 indicating that Capita is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Restore currently has a consensus target price of GBX 367.33, indicating a potential upside of 40.47%. Capita has a consensus target price of GBX 464.20, indicating a potential upside of 17.82%. Given Restore's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts plainly believe Restore is more favorable than Capita.

Restore has a beta of 0.124, suggesting that its stock price is 88% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Capita has a beta of 0.818, suggesting that its stock price is 18% less volatile than the broader market.

Restore has a net margin of 0.43% compared to Capita's net margin of -7.45%. Restore's return on equity of 0.58% beat Capita's return on equity.

Restore has higher earnings, but lower revenue than Capita. Restore is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Capita, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

39.5% of RWS shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 21.6% of Restore shares are owned by institutional investors. 24.7% of RWS shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 15.9% of Restore shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a stock will outperform the market over the long term.

RWS has a beta of 0.485, suggesting that its share price is 52% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Restore has a beta of 0.124, suggesting that its share price is 88% less volatile than the broader market.

Restore has lower revenue, but higher earnings than RWS. Restore is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than RWS, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

In the previous week, Restore had 4 more articles in the media than RWS. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Restore and 1 mentions for RWS. Restore's average media sentiment score of 0.14 beat RWS's score of 0.05 indicating that Restore is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Restore has a net margin of 0.43% compared to RWS's net margin of -14.46%. Restore's return on equity of 0.58% beat RWS's return on equity.

RWS pays an annual dividend of GBX 12.45 per share and has a dividend yield of 12.7%. Restore pays an annual dividend of GBX 6 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.3%. RWS pays out -46.1% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Restore pays out -127.7% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years.

RWS currently has a consensus price target of GBX 172.50, indicating a potential upside of 75.66%. Restore has a consensus price target of GBX 367.33, indicating a potential upside of 40.47%. Given RWS's higher probable upside, equities analysts plainly believe RWS is more favorable than Restore.

DWF Group has higher revenue and earnings than Restore. Restore is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than DWF Group, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Restore has a beta of 0.124, indicating that its share price is 88% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, DWF Group has a beta of 0.62, indicating that its share price is 38% less volatile than the broader market.

In the previous week, Restore had 5 more articles in the media than DWF Group. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Restore and 0 mentions for DWF Group. Restore's average media sentiment score of 0.14 beat DWF Group's score of 0.00 indicating that Restore is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Restore currently has a consensus target price of GBX 367.33, suggesting a potential upside of 40.47%. Given Restore's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts plainly believe Restore is more favorable than DWF Group.

21.6% of Restore shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 36.2% of DWF Group shares are held by institutional investors. 15.9% of Restore shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 54.9% of DWF Group shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, endowments and hedge funds believe a stock will outperform the market over the long term.

Restore pays an annual dividend of GBX 6 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.3%. DWF Group pays an annual dividend of GBX 5 per share. Restore pays out -127.7% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. DWF Group pays out 12,500.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Restore is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

DWF Group has a net margin of 2.76% compared to Restore's net margin of 0.43%. DWF Group's return on equity of 19.89% beat Restore's return on equity.

Franchise Brands pays an annual dividend of GBX 2.45 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.7%. Restore pays an annual dividend of GBX 6 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.3%. Franchise Brands pays out 52.8% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Restore pays out -127.7% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. Restore is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

19.9% of Franchise Brands shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 21.6% of Restore shares are held by institutional investors. 31.8% of Franchise Brands shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 15.9% of Restore shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, large money managers and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

In the previous week, Franchise Brands had 3 more articles in the media than Restore. MarketBeat recorded 8 mentions for Franchise Brands and 5 mentions for Restore. Franchise Brands' average media sentiment score of 0.33 beat Restore's score of 0.14 indicating that Franchise Brands is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Franchise Brands has higher earnings, but lower revenue than Restore. Restore is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Franchise Brands, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Franchise Brands currently has a consensus price target of GBX 197.50, indicating a potential upside of 38.11%. Restore has a consensus price target of GBX 367.33, indicating a potential upside of 40.47%. Given Restore's higher possible upside, analysts clearly believe Restore is more favorable than Franchise Brands.

Franchise Brands has a net margin of 6.32% compared to Restore's net margin of 0.43%. Franchise Brands' return on equity of 4.06% beat Restore's return on equity.

Franchise Brands has a beta of 0.457, suggesting that its share price is 54% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Restore has a beta of 0.124, suggesting that its share price is 88% less volatile than the broader market.