Loading…
← CockpitCompetitor Analysis › LSTR Landstar System, Inc.Open in the cockpit ↗

Landstar System, Inc.LSTRCompetitor analysis, valuation and peers

United States · USD·Industrials›Trucking

Asset-light trucking company that arranges freight transport using a network of independent owner-operator agents rather than owning trucks.

Momentum weak 22
Mkt cap
$4.83B
US dollars, full cap
Free float
99%
of shares outstanding
$/day
$72.5M
20-day average traded
Fwd P/E
19.8×
forward earnings
ROIC−WACC
+16.6 pp
WACC 9.2%
Hurdle
+9 pp
Req g minus delivered
Next earnings
82 days
27 Jan 2027
Close · USD$143.34
1D-1.6%
1W+0.5%
1M-15.4%
3M-19.6%
6M-21.8%
YTD-0.2%
1Y+12.0%
ATR %4.2%
Beta0.70
52w lowhigh37.3% off high

What Landstar System does

Asset-light trucking company that arranges freight transport using a network of independent owner-operator agents rather than owning trucks.

Its independent sales agents bring in freight from shippers, and Landstar keeps the difference between what the customer pays and what it pays the agent and the independent truckers who haul the load. With no trucks of its own, costs stay variable and capital needs low.

Products and services

  • Truckload brokerage (owner-operator network)
  • Logistics/freight brokerage

Customers

  • Manufacturers
  • Retailers
  • Industrial shippers

Where it sits in the supply chain

  • Industrials
  • Ground transportation
  • Truck brokerage

What could go right

  • Freight brokerage market share gains
  • Asset-light model flexes with the cycle

What could go wrong

  • Freight rate/spot market cyclicality
  • Owner-operator capacity availability

Moat: narrow (network effects, distribution). A large network of independent agents/owner-operators gives capacity flexibility without owning a fleet.

Headquarters: Jacksonville, Florida, USA · Founded: 1968 · Employees: 1,378

Named competitors

Landstar System at a glance

Size Landstar System (LSTR) is a United States Industrials company (Trucking) with a market value of $4.83B, the 1206th largest of 3,117 United States companies the cockpit tracks. Shares closed at $143.34 on 6 Nov 2026.

Performance Over six months the shares fell 21.8%, against -8.8% for the median peer and -1.1% for the United States market (cap-weighted) — 4th lowest of 12 in its peer set.

Growth Revenue grew 10.7% over the last twelve months (peer median +7.4%); the operating margin is 3.9% (peer median 5.5%).

Valuation It trades at 19.8× forward earnings against a peer median of 16.9× (4th most expensive of 13).

Price implies For today's price to make sense, revenue must grow about 12% a year for seven years (Req g). Recent delivered growth is +3%, so the hurdle is +9 pp: the price needs faster growth than the company has been delivering — of companies that just grew 25–50% a year, 93.8% slowed down over the next four years.

Capital Return on invested capital runs 16.6 points above its cost of capital (9.2% WACC).

Short interest Short interest is 4.8% of the free float (15 Oct 2026).

Next results Next results expected around 27 Jan 2027 (exchange calendar; dates can move).

Relative performance

8010012011 May 202611 Aug 20266 Nov 2026Peer median 94LSTR 80
Six months, rebased to 100: Landstar System against the median of its 12 peers (local-currency closes).

Landstar System financials

Reported figures in USD; fiscal year ends 2025-12-31. TTM = trailing twelve months.
TTMFY2025FY2024FY2023FY2022
Revenue$5.29B$4.74B$4.82B$5.30B$7.44B
Revenue growth—-2%-9%-29%—
Gross profit$708M$622M$625M$714M$960M
EBITDA$247M$216M$291M$392M$625M
Net income$160M$115M$196M$264M$431M
Free cash flow$157M$215M$256M$368M$596M
Capital expenditure$13.8M$9.88M$31.0M$25.7M$26.0M
Total debt$152M$134M$164M$134M$198M

Quarterly statements and history in the cockpit →

Landstar System competitor charts

The default views of Competitor Analysis ▸ Charts, drawn from the same data. Open them in the cockpit to change the axes, pin companies and read every value.

Performance: 6-month against 1-month return

-20%0%+20%+40%-20%-10%0%+10%SNDR6031629072TFIIARCBSAIA9076KNXMTLSTFWERNLSTR6-month return →1-month return →
Up and to the right = strong over both horizons. Landstar System is the large dot.

Fundamentals: revenue growth against valuation

0%+20%+40%+60%10×15×20×25×SNDR6031629072TFIIARCBSAIA9076KNXMTLSTFWERNFDXFLSTRRevenue growth (TTM) →Forward P/E →
Further right = faster growth; higher = more expensive. The dashed lines are the peer medians. Landstar System is the large dot.

Capital: growth delivered against growth the price implies

0%+20%+40%0%20%40%SNDR6031629072TFIIARCBSAIA9076KNXMTLSTFLSTRGrowth delivered (Del g) →Growth the price implies (Req g, 7 yrs) →
Above the diagonal = the price needs more growth than the company has been delivering; below = the price already allows for a slowdown. Landstar System is the large dot.

Landstar System competitors and peer comparison

Head to head with its named competitors (LSTR vs JBHT vs KNX vs CHRW)
CompanyMarket cap6M returnRevenue growthOp. marginForward P/EReq g
Landstar System LSTR$4.83B-22%+11%4%19.8×12.0%
J.B. Hunt JBHT$20.3B-11%+11%7%24.3×16.8%
Knight-Swift Transportation KNX$9.51B-9%+7%4%15.6×21.3%
C.H. Robinson CHRW$14.5B-27%+10%5%17.2×9.2%

How Landstar System compares with its peers

Peer set: Industry: the same industry and sector in any market, nearest in size. This is the same default set the interactive Competitor Analysis opens with.

Landstar System against its 12 peers (data as of 6 Nov 2026)
MeasureLSTRPeer medianRank in peer set
1-month return-15.4%-6.5%4th lowest of 13
6-month return-21.8%-8.8%4th lowest of 12
Distance from 52-week high-37.3%-31.2%6th lowest of 13
Revenue growth (TTM)+10.7%+7.4%4th highest of 13
Operating margin3.9%5.5%5th lowest of 13
Forward P/E19.8×16.9×4th most expensive of 13
Growth the price implies (Req g, 7 yrs)12.0%11.8%6th least demanding of 11
Growth delivered (Del g)+2.8%+10.0%lowest of 11
Hurdle (Req g minus delivered)+9.2 pp+0.4 pp5th most demanding of 11
ROIC minus cost of capital+16.6 pp-1.5 pphighest of 13
Net debt / EBITDA-0.8×2.1×least indebted of 12

Peer table

Peer set: Industry: the same industry and sector in any market, nearest in size
CompanyMarketMarket cap6M returnRevenue growthOp. marginForward P/EReq gDelivered g
Landstar System LSTRUnited States$4.83B-22%+11%4%19.8×12.0%+2.8%
Schneider National SNDRUnited States$4.88B-10%+6%3%18.7×19.5%+4.5%
Fujian Highton Development 603162.SSChina$3.60B+3%+72%17%11.4×3.8%+45.6%
NIKKON 9072.TJapan$3.25B-19%+7%9%26.9×12.0%+8.1%
TFI International TFII.TOCanada$7.86B-29%+3%7%14.2×11.6%+16.8%
ArcBest ARCBUnited States$2.86B+6%+8%3%13.6×16.5%+6.4%
Saia SAIAUnited States$8.86B-26%+9%11%24.0×27.4%+12.2%
Seino 9076.TJapan$2.48B+9%+7%5%14.5×-3.2%+6.5%
Knight-Swift Transportation KNXUnited States$9.51B-9%+7%4%15.6×21.3%+9.8%
Mullen MTL.TOCanada$1.98B+36%+12%9%18.2×6.5%+12.9%
STEF STF.PAFrance$1.79B+12%+8%4%11.0×7.1%+10.2%
Werner Enterprises WERNUnited States$1.62B-26%+15%2%18.8×n/an/a
FedEx Freight FDXFUnited States$18.5Bn/a-1%6%24.7×n/an/a

Questions

Who are Landstar System's main competitors?
Named competitors: J.B. Hunt (ICS brokerage) (JBHT), Knight-Swift (brokerage) (KNX), C.H. Robinson (CHRW). The cockpit's measured peer set (industry) also includes Schneider National (SNDR), Fujian Highton Development (603162.SS), NIKKON (9072.T), TFI International (TFII.TO), ArcBest (ARCB), Saia (SAIA).
Is Landstar System expensive compared with its peers?
On forward p/e it trades at 19.8× against a peer median of 16.9×, 4th most expensive of 13 in its peer set. For today's price to make sense, revenue must grow about 12% a year for seven years (Req g). Recent delivered growth is +3%, so the hurdle is +9 pp: the price needs faster growth than the company has been delivering — of companies that just grew 25–50% a year, 93.8% slowed down over the next four years.
How has Landstar System stock performed?
Over six months to 6 Nov 2026 the shares returned -21.8% against -8.8% for the median peer; over one year +12.0%.

How these numbers are made. Returns are close-to-close in local currency. Revenue growth and margins are trailing twelve months. Req g is the revenue growth that today's enterprise value requires for seven years at the company's own cost of capital; Delivered g is what it actually grew; the gap is the hurdle (honest precision about ±8 points, so read the ranking more than the decimal). No fair values, price targets or analyst ratings are shown, by design. Method and validation.