Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Ryder System, Inc.
How Ryder System, Inc. stacks up
R · against 306 other Industrials companies of similar size
Growth
40/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #230 of 307 · scores higher than 25% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score29 peers with a growth score of 40–49, including R · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 40?
Weighted metrics compared with all Industrials companies.Its metrics sit close to the Industrials norm.
- slower revenue growth over the last year: weaker than 62% of peers. Revenue growth: 1.1% vs peer median 4.4%
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: 2.3% vs peer median 4.2%
- Earnings per share growth is close to the peer norm. Earnings per share growth: 4.7% vs peer median 7.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = R, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | R | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 307 reported | 1.1% | 6.5% | 25% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 279 reported | 4.7% | 11.0% | 37% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 305 reported | 2.3% | 6.6% | 25% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around R| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.7B USD | 100 | 53 | |
| 2 | 6.1B USD | 99 | 55 | |
| 2 | 1.22T INR (≈$14.6B) | 99 | 72 | |
| 2 | 12.1B USD | 99 | 48 | |
| 2 | 5.5B USD | 99 | 52 | |
| 225 | 15.4B USD | 42 | 54 | |
| 227 | 8.6B USD | 41 | 41 | |
| 227 | 6.1B USD | 41 | 62 | |
| 227 | 8.8B USD | 41 | 54 | |
| 230 | 10.8B USD | 40 | 39 | |
| 230 | 6.2B CHF (≈$7.1B) | 40 | 50 | |
| 232 | 82.6B NOK (≈$7.8B) | 39 | 74 | |
| 232 | 97.3B SEK (≈$9.7B) | 39 | 43 | |
| 232 | 9.1B GBP (≈$11.8B) | 39 | 47 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score