Latest revenue
$214.1M
as of 2026-03-31
Latest net income
$4.7M
as of 2026-03-31
Net margin
2.2%
as of 2026-03-31
Community sentiment
Where do you think RLGT is heading?
Keep private notes on RLGT — thesis, target price, catalysts to watch.
Visible only to you. Never shared. Never used to train AI.
RLGT vs S&P 500 · rebased to 100
Background shading marks the US business-cycle phase at each point in time — early, mid and late expansion, then recession— so you can see which economic backdrop each move happened in. Recessions are NBER-official; expansion sub-phases are ActaClear's editorial dating.
Live market
delayed ≤15 min- Market cap
- $430.9M
- Enterprise value
- $416.4M
- P/E (trailing)
- 24.9×
- Forward P/E
- —
- P/B
- 1.84×
- Dividend yield
- 0.0%
- 52-wk high
- $9.43
- 52-wk low
- $5.78
- Beta
- —
- Shares out
- 46.8M
What this company does
ITEM 1. BUSINESS Our Company Radiant Logistics, Inc., and its consolidated subsidiaries (the “Company,” “we” or “us”), operates as a leading third-party logistics company, providing technology-enabled global transportation and value-added logistics services primarily in the United States and Canada. We service a large, broad and diversified account base across a range of industries and geographies, which is supported by an extensive network of operating locations across North America as well as an integrated international service partner network located in other key markets around the globe. The Company provides these services through a multi-brand network, which includes over 100 operating…
AI summary unavailable — showing raw filing excerpt
Generated from RLGT's filing dated 2025-09-15
Key risks
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS RISKS PARTICULAR TO OUR BUSINESS You should carefully consider the risk factors set forth below as well as the other information contained in or incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K before investing in our common stock. Any of the following risks could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. In such a case, you may lose all or part of your investment. The risks described below are not the only risks facing us. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or those we currently view to be immaterial may also materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or…
AI summary unavailable — showing raw filing excerpt
Generated from RLGT's filing dated 2025-09-15
ActaClear Score
Computed from 5 years of SEC fundamentals + latest market data, ranked within Arrangement of Transportation of Freight & Cargo (9 peers). 10 = best in industry, 5 = median, 0 = worst. Refreshed Jun 15, 2026.
Fair value · DCF
Methodology + caveats (click to expand)
Method. 10-year forecast of free cash flow, discounted at the company's WACC, with a Gordon-growth terminal at year 10. FCF is proxied by last fiscal-year net income (proper FCF needs CFO − CapEx by year, which we don't store yet). Beta defaults to 1.0 when not reported.
Why DCF is fragile. Treat the output as a thinking aid, not a verdict. Honest weaknesses of any DCF:
- Growth is the dominant assumption. No one can foresee 10 years of growth — small changes in the slider can double or halve fair value. The reverse-DCF readout above tells you what the market is implicitly assuming; ask yourself whether that's realistic before trusting either number.
- Terminal value dominates. In most DCFs, 60-80% of the answer comes from the terminal-value calculation — i.e., everything AFTER year 10. A 0.5pp change in terminal growth, or in WACC, can swing fair value by 20-30%.
- WACC is itself a guess. We use a textbook CAPM cost of equity (Rf 4.3%, MRP 5.5%, β from the quote) plus a 6% pretax cost of debt — none of these are the company's actual marginal financing cost.
- No moat / disruption modelling. The model assumes the company keeps earning whatever it earns today, compounding cleanly. Competitive shifts, regulatory action, and technology disruption can invalidate the forecast overnight.
- Net income ≠ free cash flow. For capex-heavy names (semis, telcos) net income overstates distributable cash. For low-capex names (software) it understates. Both reduce the precision of the FV figure.
- Reflexivity. A high stock price often becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy via better hiring, financing, and customer trust. DCF can't see this.
Take the DCF, the reverse-DCF implied growth, the historical multiples, and the community sentiment together. When they agree, conviction. When they disagree, the disagreement is the most informative thing on the page.
Historical multiples
How does RLGT's current valuation compare to its own past?
P/E uses year-end weekly close ÷ (net income ÷ shares outstanding today). Held shares constant at today's count, which understates the per-share earnings improvement from buybacks over the period. PEG uses 5y revenue CAGR as a proxy for EPS growth — close, but not identical (margin expansion or dilution can drive a wedge). Best read as a comparator across companies and industries, not as a precise replica of historical multiples.