CMCO vs IIIV

For growth investors, Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) is the stronger pick with -5.

0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 3% for i3 Verticals, Inc. (IIIV). i3 Verticals, Inc. (IIIV) offers the better valuation at 39. 3x trailing P/E (19. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) a "Buy" — based on 11 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On forward P/E, Columbus McKinnon Corporation is actually cheaper at 7.

6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, i3 Verticals, Inc.

(IIIV) delivered a total return of -29. 1%, compared to -65. 9% for Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CMCO returned +21. 0% versus IIIV's +19. 9%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), i3 Verticals, Inc.

(IIIV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 92β versus Columbus McKinnon Corporation's 2. 32β — meaning CMCO is approximately 154% more volatile than IIIV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, i3 Verticals, Inc. (IIIV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 61% for Columbus McKinnon Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) is pulling ahead at -5.

0% versus -7. 3% for i3 Verticals, Inc. (IIIV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: i3 Verticals, Inc. grew EPS -87. 9% year-over-year, compared to -111. 2% for Columbus McKinnon Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, IIIV leads at 4. 3% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

i3 Verticals, Inc.

(IIIV) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 4% net margin versus -0. 5% for Columbus McKinnon Corporation — meaning it keeps 8. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CMCO leads at 5. 7% versus 1. 9% for IIIV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — IIIV leads at 55. 7%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

On forward earnings alone, Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) trades at 7.

6x forward P/E versus 19. 5x for i3 Verticals, Inc. — 11. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IIIV: 31. 8% to $29. 00.

In this comparison, CMCO (1.

7% yield) pays a dividend. IIIV does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, i3 Verticals, Inc.

(IIIV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 92)). Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) carries a higher beta of 2. 32 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (IIIV: +19. 9%, CMCO: +21. 0%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

These companies operate in different sectors (CMCO (Industrials) and IIIV (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

CMCO pays a dividend while IIIV does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.