FTEL vs XPOF vs PLNT

For growth investors, Planet Fitness, Inc.

(PLNT) is the stronger pick with 12. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 9% for Fitell Corporation (FTEL). Planet Fitness, Inc. (PLNT) offers the better valuation at 16. 8x trailing P/E (13. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Xponential Fitness, Inc. (XPOF) a "Buy" — based on 14 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, Xponential Fitness, Inc.

is actually cheaper at 10. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Planet Fitness, Inc.

(PLNT) delivered a total return of -42. 9%, compared to -95. 3% for Fitell Corporation (FTEL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PLNT returned +203. 6% versus FTEL's -95. 3%. 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), Planet Fitness, Inc.

(PLNT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 31β versus Xponential Fitness, Inc. 's 1. 94β — meaning XPOF is approximately 520% more volatile than PLNT relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Planet Fitness, Inc.

(PLNT) is pulling ahead at 12. 1% versus -6. 9% for Fitell Corporation (FTEL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Xponential Fitness, Inc. grew EPS 35. 2% year-over-year, compared to -228. 6% for Fitell Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, PLNT leads at 12. 2% 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.

Planet Fitness, Inc.

(PLNT) is the more profitable company, earning 16. 5% net margin versus -208. 5% for Fitell Corporation — meaning it keeps 16. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PLNT leads at 29. 8% versus -179. 1% for FTEL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PLNT leads at 82. 6%, 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, Xponential Fitness, Inc.

(XPOF) trades at 10. 9x forward P/E versus 13. 0x for Planet Fitness, Inc. — 2. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PLNT: 170. 8% to $119. 17.

In this comparison, XPOF (2.

5% yield) pays a dividend. FTEL, PLNT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Planet Fitness, Inc.

(PLNT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 31), +203. 6% 10Y return). Xponential Fitness, Inc. (XPOF) carries a higher beta of 1. 94 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PLNT: +203. 6%, XPOF: -46. 6%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: FTEL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; XPOF is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PLNT is a small-cap deep-value stock. XPOF pays a dividend while FTEL, PLNT do 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.