Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: CTAS stock price vs HUBG: inconclusive Relative valuation is incomplete for this pair. Review the available filing metrics before drawing a conclusion.
Quick read
Each company valued on the other's multiple, then compared with the market price.
Implied fair value · at HUBG's multiple
Needs HUBG P/E.
Implied fair value · at CTAS's multiple
Needs CTAS P/E.
Price unavailable
Metric by metric
Where each company leads, and how wide the gap is.
Growth edge
Reported gross margin
Operating income + D&A
Lower is better
Not comparable
Lower leverage
Statements
Annual statements in reported currencies, with calculations and source evidence.
Values retain reported currencies and share bases. Select a figure to inspect its period, calculation and filing inputs. Differences require compatible units and periods.
Explore enterprise value and market valuation multiples in the valuation sections.
Trendline
11 period-end years of reported revenue, earnings, and margins. Periods and currencies are shown with the data.
Price framework
USD market cap plus reported borrowing debt, less cash and equivalents. This EV proxy excludes investments, preferred stock and noncontrolling-interest adjustments.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Price framework
The same filing-backed model used on each company's valuation page, with company-specific inputs and calculated scenarios.
Cintas Corporation · implied price per share
Debt and bridge-cash inputs are required to translate enterprise value into equity value.
HUB GROUP, INC. · implied price per share
Debt and bridge-cash inputs are required to translate enterprise value into equity value.
Balance sheet health
Inspect reported liquidity and leverage alongside historical financial-health checks.
Financial strength on a 0–9 scale.
Bankruptcy-risk signal from balance sheet and earnings power.
Not enough data to score either balance sheet.
Cash excludes investments. EBITDA is an operating-income-plus-D&A proxy. Missing borrowing categories remain unavailable; select a value to inspect its inputs.
Comparable set
Where the pair sits against the wider comparable set.
Keep comparing
Open adjacent comparisons from the same industry to pressure-test the read across multiple pairs.
UNIFIRST CORP
CTAS vs UNF
ABM INDUSTRIES INC /DE/
CTAS vs ABM
Aramark
CTAS vs ARMK
W.W. GRAINGER, INC.
CTAS vs GWW
INTUIT INC.
CTAS vs INTU
IRON MOUNTAIN INC
CTAS vs IRM
EXPEDITORS INTERNATIONAL OF WASHINGTON INC
CTAS vs EXPD
HUNT J B TRANSPORT SERVICES INC
CTAS vs JBHT
LANDSTAR SYSTEM INC
CTAS vs LSTR
OLD DOMINION FREIGHT LINE, INC.
CTAS vs ODFL
C. H. ROBINSON WORLDWIDE, INC.
CTAS vs CHRW
LLM-powered synthesis
An explanation of the financial evidence. Check its snapshot date against the figures above.
This explanation uses an earlier data snapshot or evidence version. Review its generation date and the current figures, or refresh after signing in.
If you believe CTAS can sustain its superior 22.8% operating margin and 7.7% revenue growth, then hold or buy on pullbacks rather than chase aggressively, because the current $181.37 price already sits well above the $116.32 P/E-implied value and above the DCF range.
CTAS trades at 41.2x P/E versus HUBG at 26.4x, and the provided P/E-based implied price for CTAS is $116.32 versus a current price of $181.37, implying 35.9% downside. The market is clearly awarding CTAS a quality premium, but that premium is not supported by HUBG implied range alone, which spans a much lower $10.98 to $119.74.
Supporting Metrics
