Western Capital Resources Inc's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Western Capital Resources Inc (WCRS) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Western Capital Resources Inc vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 171M vs -M combined for tracked competitors (100.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+8.7% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Peer revenue share: Western Capital Resources Inc accounted for 100.0% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 100.0% a year earlier.
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
WCRS Sales vs. its Competitors, Q1 2022
Western Capital Resources Inc generated 100.00 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 100.00 % a year earlier.
For context: the Specialty Retail industry grew revenue 19.7% year over year, combined, vs 5.1% for Western Capital Resources Inc. Western Capital Resources Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.02% to 0.02%, a gain of 0.00 percentage points.
Western Capital Resources Inc's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Western Capital Resources Inc | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| High-Confidence Competitors (4) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 37.50 % (3 of 8) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
WCRS Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
WCRS Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
WCRS Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
Western Capital Resources Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
The franchise business model has grown in popularity over the past several decades. Franchising provides a small business owner with the opportunity to independently own and operate a business selling brand-name products or providing established services yet enjoy widespread support from the franchisor.
There is substantial and ever increasing competition in the wireless phone
industry where customers can choose between many other postpaid and no-contract
resellers, including AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile/Metro PCS and a larger
number of regional providers. We compete for customers based principally on
Cricket’s service/device offerings, price, call quality and coverage area.
Competition for the no-contract customers, the sub-industry in which we operate,
continues to grow. Other significant no-contract carriers include MetroPCS,
Virgin Mobile and Boost Mobile. There is also competition with other no-contract
phone service providers such as Straight Talk by Wal-Mart or Wal-Mart’s
Family Mobile powered by T-Mobile, an increase of national retailers offering
similar or identical products and services that we provide, such as Cricket
phones sold at Game Stop and Wal-Mart, and an increase in mobile virtual network
operator (“MVNO”) offerings.
Our Cricket store business also competes with other actual or potential authorized
sellers and distributors of Cricket products and services. The authorization
to sell Cricket products and services is granted by Cricket Wireless, LLC, a
wholly owned entity of Leap Wireless International, Inc. On March 13, 2014,
Leap Wireless International was acquired by AT&T. Presently, we believe
that our ability to compete with other sellers of Cricket products and services
will depend on the success with which we operate our current store locations.
If we successfully manage those stores and are able to develop and maintain
a strong working relationship with Cricket, we expect that we may be able to
effectively compete for additional store authorizations when and as they come
available.
In the retail garden business, within the bare root rose category, we compete
against brick and mortar garden centers and nurseries (approximately 10,000
across the United States), as well as other online and mail-order retailers,
including David Austin Roses and Regan Nursery. Across other plant categories,
we compete against Gardens Alive and their portfolio of brands, and other competitors.
Our biggest competitive advantages are our recognizable Jackson & Perkins
brand name and its proprietary patented rose varieties. The most direct competitor
for Wayside Gardens is White Flower Farms, which also focuses on high-end, premium
plants.
Within the holiday gift segment, we compete against larger competitors including
Harry and David and 1-800 Flowers, among others. Within the seed business, our
primary competitor is Burpee which, in addition to having an online presence,
supplies seed products to mass market retailers, including Wal-Mart.
Our Van Dyke’s Restorers brand competes primarily with other online retailers
since brick and mortar stores cannot afford to carry Van Dyke’s breadth
of SKUs. Our competitors are Signature Hardware, House of Antique Hardware,
and Rejuvenation Hardware (part of Williams Sonoma). The above-mentioned competitors
compete primarily in the hardware, lighting and kitchen and bath categories.
The decorative wood portion of the Van Dyke’s business is in a very fragmented
industry niche and there are no big decorative wood competitors. Van Dyke’s
competes primarily through the breadth of its product variety as well as through
its established brand name and customer list.
Like most other payday lenders, we believe that the primary competitive factors
in our business are location and customer service. We face intense competition
in an industry with relatively low barriers to entry, and we believe that the
payday lending markets are becoming more competitive as the industry matures
and consolidates. We compete with other payday lending and check cashing stores,
and with financial service entities and retail businesses that offer payday
loans or similar financial services. For example, we consider credit card companies
that offer payday features, credit unions, banks that offer small loans, and
creditors and loan services that can extend payment terms on outstanding loans
to be our competitors. In addition, we compete in part with services offered
by traditional financial institutions, most particularly with respect to the
“overdraft protection” services those institutions may offer and
the charges they levy for checks written with insufficient funds.
Additional areas of competition have arisen. Businesses offer loans over the
Internet as well as “loans by phone,” and these services compete
with the services we offer. There also has been increasing penetration of electronic
banking and related services into the check cashing and money transfer industry,
including direct deposit of payroll checks, payroll or debit cards, stored-value
cards, prepaid credit and debit cards, and electronic transfer of government
benefits.
Our competitors for pawn store merchandise sales include numerous retail and
wholesale stores, including jewelry stores, discount retail stores, consumer
electronics stores, other pawn stores, other resale stores, electronic commerce
retailers and auction sites.
The pawn industry in the United States is large and highly fragmented. The industry
consists of approximately 13,000 pawn stores owned primarily by independent
operators who own one to three locations. We consider the industry relatively
mature. The three largest pawn store operators account for approximately 10%
of the total estimated pawn stores in the United States.
Western Capital Resources Inc's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| AT&T | Named by the company | 85% |
| Gardens Alive | Named by the company | 85% |
| T-Mobile/Metro | Named by the company | 85% |
| Wal-Mart’s Family Mobile powered by T-Mobile | Named by the company | 85% |
| David Austin Roses | Named by the company | 85% |
| Straight Talk | Named by the company | 85% |
| Virgin Mobile | Named by the company | 85% |
| Best Buy | Named by the company | 85% |
| Metro | Named by the company | 85% |
| T-Mobile/Sprint/Metro | Named by the company | 85% |
| Metro | Named by the company | 85% |
| Game Stop | Named by the company | 85% |
| Straight Talk by Wal-Mart | Named by the company | 85% |
| Wal-Mart | Named by the company | 85% |
| Boost Mobile | Named by the company | 85% |
| Regan Nursery | Named by the company | 85% |
| Verizon | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Western Capital Resources Inc's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Western Capital Resources Inc's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Western Capital Resources Inc | Cellular Retail Stores 56.53 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
