PBI Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Forward Air has a net margin of -27.72% compared to Pitney Bowes's net margin of -11.19%. Pitney Bowes's return on equity of -- beat Forward Air's return on equity of -98.01%.

Pitney Bowes has a consensus price target of --, signalling upside risk potential of 104.64%. On the other hand Forward Air has an analysts' consensus of $35.49 which suggests that it could grow by 6.34%. 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 2.005, which suggesting that the stock is 100.547% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Forward Air has a beta of 1.038, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 3.771%.

Pitney Bowes has a quarterly dividend of $0.05 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.73%. Forward Air offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.24 per share. Pitney Bowes pays -9.13% of its earnings as a dividend. Forward Air pays out 14.94% of its earnings as a dividend. Forward Air's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Pitney Bowes quarterly revenues are $499.5M, which are smaller than Forward Air quarterly revenues of $655.9M. Pitney Bowes's net income of -$138.5M is lower than Forward Air's net income of -$73.4M. 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 0.34x versus 0.41x for Forward Air. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Hub Group has a net margin of -27.72% compared to Pitney Bowes's net margin of 2.39%. Pitney Bowes's return on equity of -- beat Hub Group's return on equity of 6.65%.

Pitney Bowes has a consensus price target of --, signalling upside risk potential of 104.64%. On the other hand Hub Group has an analysts' consensus of $48.60 which suggests that it could grow by 8.19%. 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 2.005, which suggesting that the stock is 100.547% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Hub Group has a beta of 0.945, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 5.522%.

Pitney Bowes has a quarterly dividend of $0.05 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.73%. Hub Group offers a yield of 1.11% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.13 per share. Pitney Bowes pays -9.13% of its earnings as a dividend. Hub Group pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Pitney Bowes quarterly revenues are $499.5M, which are smaller than Hub Group quarterly revenues of $986.9M. Pitney Bowes's net income of -$138.5M is lower than Hub Group's net income of $23.6M. Notably, Pitney Bowes's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Hub Group's PE ratio is 25.52x. 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 0.34x versus 0.70x for Hub Group. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Radiant Logistics has a net margin of -27.72% compared to Pitney Bowes's net margin of 1.66%. Pitney Bowes's return on equity of -- beat Radiant Logistics's return on equity of 4.05%.

Pitney Bowes has a consensus price target of --, signalling upside risk potential of 104.64%. On the other hand Radiant Logistics has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 38.89%. 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 2.005, which suggesting that the stock is 100.547% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Radiant Logistics has a beta of 0.879, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 12.108%.

Pitney Bowes has a quarterly dividend of $0.05 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.73%. Radiant Logistics offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Pitney Bowes pays -9.13% of its earnings as a dividend. Radiant Logistics pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Pitney Bowes quarterly revenues are $499.5M, which are larger than Radiant Logistics quarterly revenues of $203.6M. Pitney Bowes's net income of -$138.5M is lower than Radiant Logistics's net income of $3.4M. Notably, Pitney Bowes's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Radiant Logistics's PE ratio is 39.53x. 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 0.34x versus 0.41x for Radiant Logistics. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Singularity Future Technology has a net margin of -27.72% compared to Pitney Bowes's net margin of -191.82%. Pitney Bowes's return on equity of -- beat Singularity Future Technology's return on equity of -36.46%.

Pitney Bowes has a consensus price target of --, signalling upside risk potential of 104.64%. On the other hand Singularity Future Technology has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 328.92%. 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 2.005, which suggesting that the stock is 100.547% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Singularity Future Technology has a beta of 1.050, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 4.99%.

Pitney Bowes has a quarterly dividend of $0.05 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.73%. Singularity Future Technology offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Pitney Bowes pays -9.13% of its earnings as a dividend. Singularity Future Technology pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Pitney Bowes quarterly revenues are $499.5M, which are larger than Singularity Future Technology quarterly revenues of $501.4K. Pitney Bowes's net income of -$138.5M is lower than Singularity Future Technology's net income of -$961.8K. 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 0.34x versus 2.18x for Singularity Future Technology. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.