RXO vs UBER: How RXO and Uber Technologies Compare (2026)

Same yardstick, side by side (as of August 2026). Valuation lined up like this is most meaningful for two names in the same corner of the market, which these are. Figures are approximate; verify before investing.

Reading it: UBER is the cheaper of the two on forward earnings, but cheaper is not the same as better. Pair the valuation with growth (how far the forward P/E sits below the trailing P/E) and risk (beta) before you decide.

The metrics above tell you which is the marginally better business. The bigger risk for most people is not picking the slightly worse stock, it is over-concentrating. RXO and UBER share themes, so owning both, or adding either to what you already hold, can quietly push a large share of your portfolio into one bet.

This is the part a generic comparison page cannot answer, because it depends on what you own. Connect your brokerage and Walnut shows your real, combined RXO and UBER exposure, flags overlap with your existing positions, and tells you if adding one would tip you past a concentration you are comfortable with, read-only by default, with your login staying at your broker. Walnut is not an investment adviser.

RXO, Inc. was created in November 2022 when XPO spun off its asset-light North American brokered transportation business. The company does not own tractors or trailers. It sells capacity to shippers, buys it from independent carriers, and keeps the spread, which is why revenue is large (~$5.7 billion trailing twelve months) and margins are thin. Truck brokerage is roughly 74% of revenue, with two complementary businesses making up the rest: Last Mile (~18%), which delivers heavy goods like appliances and furniture into homes, and Managed Transportation (~8%), which runs outsourced freight departments for large shippers under multi-year contracts. In September 2024 RXO paid about $1.025 billion for Coyote Logistics from UPS, roughly doubling brokerage volume and moving RXO into the top three North American truck brokers behind C.H. Robinson and Total Quality Logistics. Management has said Coyote synergies run to at least $50 million.

Full RXO guide

Uber Technologies operates a global platform connecting riders, drivers, eaters, restaurants, and shippers across three segments: Mobility (ride-hailing), Delivery (Uber Eats and grocery), and Freight (logistics brokerage). As of Q1 2026 the platform served roughly 199 million monthly active consumers and processed about 3.6 billion trips in the quarter, with gross bookings running near $54 billion per quarter and about $193 billion for full-year 2025. Membership (Uber One), advertising, and cross-selling between rides and delivery are core to its network-effect flywheel.

Full UBER guide

Both fit overlapping themes, but they are not interchangeable. The useful comparison is which set of drivers and risks you want exposure to.

• RXO drivers: Truckload capacity leaving the market; Operating leverage on a fixed cost base.
• UBER drivers: Profitable marketplace scale; Free cash flow and capital returns.

A faster-growing, richer-valued name usually swings harder, so it suits a longer horizon and a higher tolerance for volatility; a steadier, more cash-generative business suits a more conservative or income-minded investor. The honest test is which set of risks you could hold through a drawdown: The largest near-term risk is legal rather than cyclical. For UBER, uber's autonomous strategy is partner-dependent, and the June 2026 end of its Waymo robotaxi pilot in Phoenix underscored the risk that AV operators build their own consumer apps and distribution instead of routing through Uber.

Growth-minded investors who believe the theme has years to run tend to accept the richer multiple for more upside; value-minded investors lean toward the cheaper forward earnings and steadier profile. Pick RXO if you believe its drivers more; UBER if you believe its. Many investors hold both, but since they share themes, that is a concentrated bet, not diversification. Decide deliberately and check overlap. For the full detail, see the RXO and UBER guides.

RXO. Price-to-earnings does not apply while the company is loss-making, so RXO is usually valued on EV to a normalized EBITDA figure, and the gap between trough EBITDA (roughly $120 million trailing) and what management thinks a recovered cycle looks like is the entire argument. The stock traded between ~$10 and ~$30 over the past year and roughly doubled in 2026 before falling back on the broker-liability news, which tells you the market is repricing the cycle assumption rather than the current results. February 2026 refinancing pushed the senior notes to May 2031 at 6.375% from 7.500%, upsized to $400 million, leaving ~$386 million of available liquidity.

UBER. As of early July 2026 Uber traded near $73 per share for a market cap around $152 billion, with a trailing P/E near 18x, well below its multi-year historical average as profits have scaled. Trailing net income of roughly $8.5 billion is flattered by gains on equity investments, so free cash flow (about $10 billion in 2025) is often viewed as a cleaner measure of underlying earnings power.

Headline figures (approximate, August 2026): RXO shows revenue (ttm) ~$5.7B, net income (ttm) ~-$105M (~-$0.62 per share), adjusted ebitda (q1 2026) ~$6M on ~$1.43B revenue, market cap ~$3.6B (~$22 per share); UBER shows revenue (ttm) ~$53.7B, net income (ttm) ~$8.5B, q1 2026 gross bookings ~$53.7B, fy2025 free cash flow ~$10B.

RXO and UBER are related but distinct: same themes, different businesses and risks. Neither wins in the abstract; the right pick is whichever thesis you actually believe, sized so you are not over-concentrated in one theme. Walnut can show your combined RXO and UBER exposure against your real portfolio. It is not an investment adviser.