PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RUSHA vs. TIMB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

RUSHA vs. TIMB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA) and TIM S.A. (TIMB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RUSHA achieves a 31.59% return, which is significantly higher than TIMB's 10.75% return.


RUSHA

1D
0.71%
1M
2.50%
YTD
31.59%
6M
25.48%
1Y
44.56%
3Y*
22.89%
5Y*
22.00%
10Y*
23.48%

TIMB

1D
3.33%
1M
-4.29%
YTD
10.75%
6M
15.10%
1Y
20.94%
3Y*
19.96%
5Y*
19.22%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RUSHA vs. TIMB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
RUSHA
Rush Enterprises, Inc.
31.59%-0.15%10.44%46.73%-4.51%36.44%13.99%
TIMB
TIM S.A.
10.75%86.96%-33.24%68.57%4.05%-13.46%23.03%

Correlation

The correlation between RUSHA and TIMB is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.13

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.13

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 16, 2020

0.15

Fundamentals

Market Cap

RUSHA:

$5.64B

TIMB:

$10.23B

EPS

RUSHA:

$3.29

TIMB:

R$9.00

PE Ratio

RUSHA:

21.45

TIMB:

12.25

PEG Ratio

RUSHA:

2.69

TIMB:

0.73

PS Ratio

RUSHA:

0.78

TIMB:

1.96

PB Ratio

RUSHA:

2.49

TIMB:

2.16

Total Revenue (TTM)

RUSHA:

$7.27B

TIMB:

R$27.04B

Gross Profit (TTM)

RUSHA:

$1.43B

TIMB:

R$14.61B

EBITDA (TTM)

RUSHA:

$500.50M

TIMB:

R$13.92B

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

RUSHA vs. TIMB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

RUSHA
RUSHA Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
RUSHA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RUSHA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
RUSHA Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
RUSHA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
RUSHA Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank

TIMB
TIMB Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
TIMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TIMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
TIMB Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
TIMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
TIMB Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

RUSHA vs. TIMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA) and TIM S.A. (TIMB). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


RUSHATIMBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.80

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.02

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.13

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.15

0.81

+1.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.12

2.26

+2.87

RUSHA vs. TIMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RUSHA Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is higher than the TIMB Sharpe Ratio of 0.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RUSHA and TIMB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

RUSHA vs. TIMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RUSHA drawdown since its inception was -71.91%, which is greater than TIMB's maximum drawdown of -37.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUSHA and TIMB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RUSHATIMBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.91%

-37.08%

-34.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.81%

-25.89%

+5.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.76%

-37.08%

+10.32%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.27%

-37.08%

+9.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.09%

-23.43%

+16.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.53%

-12.18%

-5.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.72%

9.30%

-0.58%

Volatility

RUSHA vs. TIMB - Volatility Comparison

Rush Enterprises, Inc. (RUSHA) has a higher volatility of 8.63% compared to TIM S.A. (TIMB) at 6.81%. This indicates that RUSHA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TIMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RUSHATIMBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.63%

6.81%

+1.82%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.66%

25.52%

-3.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

30.69%

31.74%

-1.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

30.58%

31.58%

-1.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.31%

32.12%

+1.19%

Dividends

RUSHA vs. TIMB - Dividend Comparison

RUSHA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%, less than TIMB's 8.51% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
RUSHA
Rush Enterprises, Inc.
1.08%1.37%1.28%1.23%1.53%1.33%0.98%1.08%0.70%
TIMB
TIM S.A.
8.51%11.67%6.03%4.98%4.05%3.43%3.05%0.00%0.00%

Financials

RUSHA vs. TIMB - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Rush Enterprises, Inc. and TIM S.A.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


1.00B2.00B3.00B4.00B5.00B6.00B7.00B20222023202420252026
1.68B
6.81B
(RUSHA) Total Revenue
(TIMB) Total Revenue
Please note, different currencies. RUSHA values in USD, TIMB values in BRL

RUSHA vs. TIMB - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Rush Enterprises, Inc. and TIM S.A. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%20222023202420252026
20.4%
52.4%
Portfolio components
RUSHA - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Rush Enterprises, Inc. reported a gross profit of 343.80M and revenue of 1.68B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 20.4%.

TIMB - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, TIM S.A. reported a gross profit of 3.56B and revenue of 6.81B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 52.4%.

RUSHA - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Rush Enterprises, Inc. reported an operating income of 82.21M and revenue of 1.68B, resulting in an operating margin of 4.9%.

TIMB - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, TIM S.A. reported an operating income of 1.57B and revenue of 6.81B, resulting in an operating margin of 23.1%.

RUSHA - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Rush Enterprises, Inc. reported a net income of 61.45M and revenue of 1.68B, resulting in a net margin of 3.7%.

TIMB - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, TIM S.A. reported a net income of 817.09M and revenue of 6.81B, resulting in a net margin of 12.0%.


Frequently Asked Questions


RUSHA and TIMB have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RUSHA has higher volatility (8.63%) compared to TIMB (6.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUSHA dropped -71.91% vs TIMB's -37.08%.

RUSHA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs 0.66), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RUSHA and TIMB

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer