$0.78
-27.8% 1M -86.6% 1Y
- Market cap
- $11.65M
- P/E
- –
- Revenue (TTM)
- —
- Div. yield
- –
Landstar System leads on 3 of the 12 questions below (Landstar System 3, Globavend Holdings 1). Which ones matter depends on what you are buying for; a cheap multiple and slow growth often come together.
| Question | GVH | LSTR | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Larger companyMarket capitalisation | $11.65M | $5.61B | LSTR |
| Cheaper on earningsLower P/E, profitable companies only | — | 42.6x | – |
| Cheaper on forward earningsLower price / next fiscal year consensus EPS | 1.1x | 26.9x | GVH |
| Faster revenue growthRevenue growth, trailing twelve months | — | +4.1% | – |
| More profitableNet margin, trailing twelve months | — | 2.6% | – |
| Better return on capitalReturn on invested capital | — | 15.1% | – |
| Less leveragedLower net debt / EBITDA | — | -1.3x | – |
| Higher dividend yieldTrailing dividend yield | — | 2.20% | – |
| Better 1-year returnPrice return, last 12 months | -86.6% | +26.9% | LSTR |
| Better 5-year returnAnnualised price return, 5 years | — | -0.7%/yr | – |
| Less volatileAnnualised volatility, 1 year | 196.8% | 35.1% | LSTR |
| Higher overall scoreMean of the five percentile scores vs peers | — | 36/100 | – |
Each axis is the mean percentile of its metrics against the company's industry group. 100 is the best in the group, 50 the middle.
| Axis | GVH | LSTR |
|---|---|---|
| Valuation | – | 12 #72 of 82 |
| Growth | – | 6 #66 of 70 |
| Profitability | – | 43 #38 of 66 |
| Financial Health | 94 #6 of 91 | 83 #16 of 91 |
| Shareholder Returns | – | 37 #27 of 42 |
| Overall | – | 36 |
Price return, split-adjusted, before dividends. Click a name to hide or show it.
| Period | GVH | LSTR | SPY |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 month | -27.8% | +0.9% | -0.8% |
| 3 months | -18.7% | -13.8% | +3.5% |
| 6 months | -78.3% | -8.3% | +7.0% |
| Year to date | -45.8% | +14.9% | +12.2% |
| 1 year | -86.6% | +26.9% | +13.0% |
| 3 years | — | +1.6% | +86.3% |
| 3 years, per year | — | +0.5% | +23.1% |
| 5 years | — | -3.6% | +68.6% |
| 5 years, per year | — | -0.7% | +11.0% |
| 10 years | — | +133.5% | +258.0% |
| 10 years, per year | — | +8.8% | +13.6% |
| Measure | GVH | LSTR | SPY |
|---|---|---|---|
| Volatility, 1Y | 196.8% | 35.1% | 12.7% |
| Downside volatility, 1Y | 227.6% | 37.1% | 12.7% |
| Beta vs S&P 500, 1Y | 1.22 | 0.71 | 1.00 |
| Return / volatility, 1Y | -0.44 | 0.77 | 1.02 |
| Max drawdown, 5Y | -99.8% | -41.2% | -25.4% |
| From 52-week high | -87.0% | -26.7% | -1.8% |
| 52-week high | $5.98 | $225.37 | $779.14 |
| 52-week low | $0.78 | $121.51 | $631.97 |
Weekly multiples on trailing twelve-month fundamentals. Negative or extreme readings (a loss year, a collapsed denominator) are left out so the chart stays readable.
| Multiple | GVH | LSTR |
|---|---|---|
| P/E now vs peer median | —median 10.7x | 42.6xmedian 10.7x |
| P/S now vs peer median | —median 1.2x | 1.1xmedian 1.2x |
| EV/EBITDA now vs peer median | —median 6.6x | 24.4xmedian 6.6x |
| P/FCF now vs peer median | —median 7.1x | 31.9xmedian 7.1x |
| P/B now vs peer median | 1.1xmedian 0.9x | 6.7xmedian 0.9x |
| PEG now vs peer median | —median 0.68 | -1.66median 0.68 |
Reported figures by fiscal period, placed on the calendar year (or quarter) each period ended in, so companies with different fiscal years line up.
Bold marks the best reading: the lowest positive value for multiples, leverage and payout, the highest for everything else. The bar under each value is its percentile against that company's own peers. Hover a value for its rank and the peer median.
| Metric | GVH | LSTR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (1Y) | – | 4.1% |
| Revenue CAGR (3Y) | – | -7.5% |
| Gross profit growth (1Y) | – | – |
| Gross profit CAGR (3Y) | – | – |
| Operating income growth (1Y) | – | -19.0% |
| Operating income CAGR (3Y) | – | -26.8% |
| Net income growth (1Y) | – | -21.6% |
| Net income CAGR (3Y) | – | -27.0% |
| EPS growth (1Y) | – | -19.4% |
| EPS CAGR (3Y) | – | -25.6% |
| Operating cash flow growth (1Y) | – | -8.3% |
| Operating cash flow CAGR (3Y) | – | -32.0% |
| Free cash flow growth (1Y) | – | -6.8% |
| Free cash flow CAGR (3Y) | – | -32.6% |
| Metric | GVH | LSTR |
|---|---|---|
| Gross margin | – | – |
| EBITDA margin | – | 4.4% |
| Operating margin | – | 3.5% |
| Pretax margin | – | 3.5% |
| Net margin | – | 2.6% |
| FCF margin | – | 3.5% |
| Operating cash flow margin | – | 3.8% |
| Return on equity | – | 16.1% |
| Return on assets | – | 7.9% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 15.1% |
| Return on capital employed | – | 18.5% |
| Asset turnover | – | 3.0x |
| Cash conversion (OCF / net income) | – | 1.4x |
| Stock comp / revenue | – | 0.2% |
Solid lines are reported fiscal-year results; dashed lines are the consensus for the years ahead. Hover a year for the analysts' high and low, and how each result compared with its estimate.
| Consensus | GVH | LSTR |
|---|---|---|
| Forward P/E | 1.1xFY2026 | 26.9xFY2026 |
| EPS, next fiscal year | $0.69FY2026 | $6.15FY2026 |
| EPS growth, next FY | -57.1%FY2026 | +85.8%FY2026 |
| EPS growth, the year after | – | +27.8% |
| Revenue, next fiscal year | $22.73MFY2026 | $5.45BFY2026 |
| Revenue growth, next FY | -3.5%FY2026 | +15.1%FY2026 |
| Revenue growth, the year after | – | +17.6% |
1.00 means two stocks move in lockstep, 0 that they move independently. Pairs below about 0.5 diversify each other.
| GVH | LSTR | |
|---|---|---|
| GVH | 1.00 | 0.02 |
| LSTR | 0.02 | 1.00 |
Landstar System (LSTR) is the largest by market capitalisation: Globavend Holdings (GVH) $11.65M, Landstar System (LSTR) $5.61B.
Over the past year Landstar System (LSTR) returned the most: Globavend Holdings (GVH) -86.6%, Landstar System (LSTR) +26.9%. Returns are price only, before dividends.
Only one of these companies pays a dividend: Landstar System (LSTR) 2.20%. Globavend Holdings (GVH) pays no regular dividend.
By one-year price volatility, Landstar System (LSTR) has been the steadiest (Globavend Holdings (GVH) 196.8%, Landstar System (LSTR) 35.1%). Volatility measures how widely the price swings, not the risk of the business.
Their daily returns over the past year have a correlation of 0.02, a weak relationship. Holding both diversifies more than two closely linked stocks would.
There is no single answer; it depends on what you are buying for. On the 12 head-to-head measures on this page, Landstar System (LSTR) leads on 3. Business Quant does not give investment advice; use the comparison as a starting point for your own research.
Data from SEC filings, exchange prices and consensus estimates, via Business Quant. Percentile scores compare each company with its own peer group, so two companies' scores are each relative to different peers unless you rank against the whole market. Price returns exclude dividends. Nothing on this page is investment advice.