LAMR vs CCO

For growth investors, Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc.

(CCO) is the stronger pick with 6. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 7% for Lamar Advertising Company (LAMR). Lamar Advertising Company (LAMR) offers the better valuation at 26. 2x trailing P/E (26. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lamar Advertising Company (LAMR) a "Buy" — based on 20 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.

Over the past 5 years, Lamar Advertising Company (LAMR) delivered a total return of +68.

1%, compared to -7. 0% for Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LAMR returned +206. 2% versus CCO's -43. 7%. 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), Lamar Advertising Company (LAMR) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

64β versus Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 31β — meaning CCO is approximately 106% more volatile than LAMR relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc.

(CCO) is pulling ahead at 6. 6% versus 2. 7% for Lamar Advertising Company (LAMR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Lamar Advertising Company grew EPS 63. 9% year-over-year, compared to 43. 2% for Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CCO leads at 5. 1% 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.

Lamar Advertising Company (LAMR) is the more profitable company, earning 25.

9% net margin versus -6. 5% for Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 25. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LAMR leads at 30. 8% versus 19. 0% for CCO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CCO leads at 42. 5%, 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.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LAMR: -4.

1% to $145. 00.

In this comparison, LAMR (4.

3% yield) pays a dividend. CCO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Lamar Advertising Company (LAMR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

64), 4. 3% yield, +206. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LAMR: +206. 2%, CCO: -43. 7%), 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 (LAMR (Real Estate) and CCO (Communication Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: LAMR is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; CCO is a small-cap quality compounder stock. LAMR pays a dividend while CCO 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.