PBI Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Forward Air has a net margin of -7.24% compared to Pitney Bowes's net margin of -5.75%. Pitney Bowes's return on equity of -- beat Forward Air's return on equity of -130.8%.

Pitney Bowes has a consensus price target of $17.00, signalling upside risk potential of 81.24%. On the other hand Forward Air has an analysts' consensus of $35.50 which suggests that it could grow by 67.06%. Given that Pitney Bowes has higher upside potential than Forward Air, analysts believe Pitney Bowes is more attractive than Forward Air.

Pitney Bowes has a beta of 2.024, which suggesting that the stock is 102.374% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Forward Air has a beta of 1.082, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 8.249%.

Pitney Bowes has a quarterly dividend of $0.06 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.24%. Forward Air offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.24 per share. Pitney Bowes pays -17.66% of its earnings as a dividend. Forward Air pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Pitney Bowes quarterly revenues are $516.1M, which are smaller than Forward Air quarterly revenues of $632.8M. Pitney Bowes's net income of -$37.4M is lower than Forward Air's net income of -$36.4M. Notably, Pitney Bowes's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Forward Air's PE ratio is 9.40x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Pitney Bowes is 0.64x versus 0.24x for Forward Air. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Hub Group has a net margin of -7.24% compared to Pitney Bowes's net margin of 2.5%. Pitney Bowes's return on equity of -- beat Hub Group's return on equity of 6.33%.

Pitney Bowes has a consensus price target of $17.00, signalling upside risk potential of 81.24%. On the other hand Hub Group has an analysts' consensus of $47.31 which suggests that it could grow by 26.2%. Given that Pitney Bowes has higher upside potential than Hub Group, analysts believe Pitney Bowes is more attractive than Hub Group.

Pitney Bowes has a beta of 2.024, which suggesting that the stock is 102.374% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Hub Group has a beta of 0.927, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 7.33%.

Pitney Bowes has a quarterly dividend of $0.06 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.24%. Hub Group offers a yield of 1.33% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.13 per share. Pitney Bowes pays -17.66% of its earnings as a dividend. Hub Group pays out 29.07% of its earnings as a dividend. Hub Group's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Pitney Bowes quarterly revenues are $516.1M, which are smaller than Hub Group quarterly revenues of $973.5M. Pitney Bowes's net income of -$37.4M is lower than Hub Group's net income of $24.4M. Notably, Pitney Bowes's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Hub Group's PE ratio is 22.05x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Pitney Bowes is 0.64x versus 0.58x for Hub Group. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Radiant Logistics has a net margin of -7.24% compared to Pitney Bowes's net margin of 2.45%. Pitney Bowes's return on equity of -- beat Radiant Logistics's return on equity of 6.63%.

Pitney Bowes has a consensus price target of $17.00, signalling upside risk potential of 81.24%. On the other hand Radiant Logistics has an analysts' consensus of $9.67 which suggests that it could grow by 57.77%. Given that Pitney Bowes has higher upside potential than Radiant Logistics, analysts believe Pitney Bowes is more attractive than Radiant Logistics.

Pitney Bowes has a beta of 2.024, which suggesting that the stock is 102.374% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Radiant Logistics has a beta of 0.865, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 13.55%.

Pitney Bowes has a quarterly dividend of $0.06 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.24%. Radiant Logistics offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Pitney Bowes pays -17.66% of its earnings as a dividend. Radiant Logistics pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Pitney Bowes quarterly revenues are $516.1M, which are larger than Radiant Logistics quarterly revenues of $264.5M. Pitney Bowes's net income of -$37.4M is lower than Radiant Logistics's net income of $6.5M. Notably, Pitney Bowes's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Radiant Logistics's PE ratio is 22.07x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Pitney Bowes is 0.64x versus 0.35x for Radiant Logistics. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Singularity Future Technology has a net margin of -7.24% compared to Pitney Bowes's net margin of -69.07%. Pitney Bowes's return on equity of -- beat Singularity Future Technology's return on equity of -26.26%.

Pitney Bowes has a consensus price target of $17.00, signalling upside risk potential of 81.24%. On the other hand Singularity Future Technology has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 420.83%. Given that Singularity Future Technology has higher upside potential than Pitney Bowes, analysts believe Singularity Future Technology is more attractive than Pitney Bowes.

Pitney Bowes has a beta of 2.024, which suggesting that the stock is 102.374% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Singularity Future Technology has a beta of 1.657, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 65.722%.

Pitney Bowes has a quarterly dividend of $0.06 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.24%. Singularity Future Technology offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Pitney Bowes pays -17.66% of its earnings as a dividend. Singularity Future Technology pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Pitney Bowes quarterly revenues are $516.1M, which are larger than Singularity Future Technology quarterly revenues of $474.6K. Pitney Bowes's net income of -$37.4M is lower than Singularity Future Technology's net income of -$327.8K. Notably, Pitney Bowes's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Singularity Future Technology's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Pitney Bowes is 0.64x versus 2.51x for Singularity Future Technology. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.