vs

Side-by-side financial comparison of Cushman & Wakefield Ltd. (CWK) and RUSH ENTERPRISES INC \TX\ (RUSHA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.

Cushman & Wakefield Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.9B vs $1.7B, roughly 1.7× RUSH ENTERPRISES INC \TX\). RUSH ENTERPRISES INC \TX\ runs the higher net margin — 3.7% vs -0.8%, a 4.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Cushman & Wakefield Ltd. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (10.8% vs -9.0%). RUSH ENTERPRISES INC \TX\ produced more free cash flow last quarter ($411.6M vs $234.3M). Over the past eight quarters, Cushman & Wakefield Ltd.'s revenue compounded faster (15.5% CAGR vs -6.8%).

Cushman & Wakefield Inc. is an American global commercial real estate and property management services firm. The company's corporate headquarters is located in Chicago, Illinois. It is named after co-founders J. Clydesdale Cushman and Bernard Wakefield.

Rush Enterprises is an American commercial vehicle dealership headquartered in New Braunfels, Texas. It primarily sells new and used trucks, through its Rush Truck Centers. In 2019, the company operated over 200 Rush Truck Centers in 20 U.S. states as well as 14 locations in Canada. As of 2020, it was a Fortune 500 corporation.

CWK vs RUSHA — Head-to-Head

Bigger by revenue
CWK
CWK
1.7× larger
CWK
$2.9B
$1.7B
RUSHA
Growing faster (revenue YoY)
CWK
CWK
+19.8% gap
CWK
10.8%
-9.0%
RUSHA
Higher net margin
RUSHA
RUSHA
4.4% more per $
RUSHA
3.7%
-0.8%
CWK
More free cash flow
RUSHA
RUSHA
$177.3M more FCF
RUSHA
$411.6M
$234.3M
CWK
Faster 2-yr revenue CAGR
CWK
CWK
Annualised
CWK
15.5%
-6.8%
RUSHA

Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026

Metric
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Revenue
$2.9B
$1.7B
Net Profit
$-22.4M
$61.7M
Gross Margin
20.4%
Operating Margin
6.1%
4.9%
Net Margin
-0.8%
3.7%
Revenue YoY
10.8%
-9.0%
Net Profit YoY
-119.8%
1.8%
EPS (diluted)
$-0.10
$0.77

Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.

8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend

Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.

Revenue
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
$1.7B
Q4 25
$2.9B
$1.7B
Q3 25
$2.6B
$1.8B
Q2 25
$2.5B
$1.8B
Q1 25
$2.3B
$1.8B
Q4 24
$2.6B
$1.9B
Q3 24
$2.3B
$1.8B
Q2 24
$2.3B
$1.9B
Net Profit
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
$61.7M
Q4 25
$-22.4M
$64.3M
Q3 25
$51.4M
$66.7M
Q2 25
$57.3M
$72.4M
Q1 25
$1.9M
$60.3M
Q4 24
$112.9M
$74.8M
Q3 24
$33.7M
$79.1M
Q2 24
$13.5M
$78.7M
Gross Margin
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
20.4%
Q4 25
20.8%
Q3 25
21.0%
Q2 25
20.7%
Q1 25
20.3%
Q4 24
19.3%
Q3 24
21.0%
Q2 24
20.2%
Operating Margin
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
4.9%
Q4 25
6.1%
5.5%
Q3 25
4.1%
5.6%
Q2 25
4.9%
6.0%
Q1 25
2.0%
5.2%
Q4 24
6.6%
5.8%
Q3 24
3.2%
6.7%
Q2 24
3.1%
6.4%
Net Margin
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
3.7%
Q4 25
-0.8%
3.8%
Q3 25
2.0%
3.7%
Q2 25
2.3%
3.9%
Q1 25
0.1%
3.4%
Q4 24
4.3%
3.9%
Q3 24
1.4%
4.4%
Q2 24
0.6%
4.1%
EPS (diluted)
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
$0.77
Q4 25
$-0.10
$0.81
Q3 25
$0.22
$0.83
Q2 25
$0.25
$0.90
Q1 25
$0.01
$0.73
Q4 24
$0.49
$-95.13
Q3 24
$0.14
$0.97
Q2 24
$0.06
$97.00

Balance Sheet & Financial Strength

Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.

Metric
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand
$784.2M
Total DebtLower is stronger
$2.7B
$277.8M
Stockholders' EquityBook value
$2.0B
$2.3B
Total Assets
$7.7B
$4.5B
Debt / EquityLower = less leverage
1.40×
0.12×

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Cash + ST Investments
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
Q4 25
$784.2M
$212.6M
Q3 25
$634.4M
$242.0M
Q2 25
$618.2M
$211.1M
Q1 25
$623.2M
$228.7M
Q4 24
$793.3M
$228.1M
Q3 24
$775.4M
$185.1M
Q2 24
$567.3M
$167.3M
Total Debt
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
$277.8M
Q4 25
$2.7B
$274.8M
Q3 25
$2.8B
Q2 25
$3.0B
Q1 25
$3.0B
Q4 24
$3.0B
$408.4M
Q3 24
$3.1B
Q2 24
$3.1B
Stockholders' Equity
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
$2.3B
Q4 25
$2.0B
$2.2B
Q3 25
$2.0B
$2.2B
Q2 25
$1.9B
$2.2B
Q1 25
$1.8B
$2.2B
Q4 24
$1.8B
$2.1B
Q3 24
$1.7B
$2.1B
Q2 24
$1.6B
$2.0B
Total Assets
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
$4.5B
Q4 25
$7.7B
$4.4B
Q3 25
$7.7B
$4.6B
Q2 25
$7.6B
$4.7B
Q1 25
$7.4B
$4.7B
Q4 24
$7.5B
$4.6B
Q3 24
$7.5B
$4.6B
Q2 24
$7.3B
$4.5B
Debt / Equity
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
0.12×
Q4 25
1.40×
0.12×
Q3 25
1.45×
Q2 25
1.57×
Q1 25
1.70×
Q4 24
1.73×
0.19×
Q3 24
1.81×
Q2 24
1.91×

Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency

How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.

Metric
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Operating Cash FlowLast quarter
$257.3M
Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex
$234.3M
$411.6M
FCF MarginFCF / Revenue
8.0%
24.4%
Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue
0.8%
2.0%
Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit
TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters
$293.0M
$828.4M

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Operating Cash Flow
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
Q4 25
$257.3M
$112.9M
Q3 25
$235.5M
$367.8M
Q2 25
$9.6M
$227.6M
Q1 25
$-162.0M
$153.5M
Q4 24
$115.2M
$392.3M
Q3 24
$196.1M
$111.7M
Q2 24
$21.8M
$270.6M
Free Cash Flow
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
$411.6M
Q4 25
$234.3M
$31.9M
Q3 25
$225.0M
$271.2M
Q2 25
$300.0K
$113.8M
Q1 25
$-166.6M
$45.1M
Q4 24
$105.9M
$263.5M
Q3 24
$186.7M
$-20.0M
Q2 24
$10.0M
$177.2M
FCF Margin
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
24.4%
Q4 25
8.0%
1.9%
Q3 25
8.6%
15.2%
Q2 25
0.0%
6.2%
Q1 25
-7.3%
2.6%
Q4 24
4.0%
13.7%
Q3 24
8.0%
-1.1%
Q2 24
0.4%
9.1%
Capex Intensity
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
2.0%
Q4 25
0.8%
4.8%
Q3 25
0.4%
5.4%
Q2 25
0.4%
6.2%
Q1 25
0.2%
6.2%
Q4 24
0.4%
6.7%
Q3 24
0.4%
7.3%
Q2 24
0.5%
4.8%
Cash Conversion
CWK
CWK
RUSHA
RUSHA
Q1 26
Q4 25
1.75×
Q3 25
4.58×
5.51×
Q2 25
0.17×
3.14×
Q1 25
-85.26×
2.55×
Q4 24
1.02×
5.25×
Q3 24
5.82×
1.41×
Q2 24
1.61×
3.44×

Financial Flow Comparison

Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.

Revenue Breakdown by Segment

CWK
CWK

Equity Method Investment Nonconsolidated Investee Or Group Of Investees$1.8B61%
Other$1.1B39%

RUSHA
RUSHA

New and used commercial vehicle sales$955.1M57%
Aftermarket products and services sales$627.2M37%
Lease and rental sales$92.3M5%
Finance and insurance$5.6M0%

Related Comparisons