Specialty Retail
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
LQDT vs HGV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gambling, Resorts & Casinos
LQDT vs HGV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Retail | Gambling, Resorts & Casinos |
| Market Cap | $1.12B | $3.95B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $480M | $5.18B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $30M | $199M |
| Gross Margin | 23.2% | 56.8% |
| Operating Margin | 8.4% | 12.1% |
| Forward P/E | 24.3x | 11.4x |
| Total Debt | $14M | $7.35B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $175M | $571M |
LQDT vs HGV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liquidity Services,… (LQDT) | 100 | 634.9 | +534.9% |
| Hilton Grand Vacati… (HGV) | 100 | 225.7 | +125.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LQDT vs HGV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LQDT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.76
- Rev growth 31.2%, EPS growth 38.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 19.4%
- 5.1% 10Y total return vs HGV's 88.1%
HGV is the clearest fit if your priority is value and momentum.
- Lower P/E (11.4x vs 24.3x)
- +27.8% vs LQDT's +15.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 31.2% revenue growth vs HGV's 1.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.4x vs 24.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 6.3% margin vs HGV's 3.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.76 vs HGV's 1.71, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +27.8% vs LQDT's +15.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.0% ROA vs HGV's 1.7%, ROIC 60.8% vs 5.0% |
LQDT vs HGV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
LQDT vs HGV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HGV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HGV is the larger business by revenue, generating $5.2B annually — 10.8x LQDT's $480M. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 6.3% (LQDT) to 3.8% (HGV). On growth, HGV holds the edge at +11.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $480M | $5.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $51M | $905M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $30M | $199M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $78M | $328M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +23.2% | +56.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +8.4% | +12.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.3% | +3.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +16.2% | +6.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.7% | +11.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.5% | +5.4% |
Valuation Metrics
HGV leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 41.7x trailing earnings, LQDT trades at a 24% valuation discount to HGV's 54.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, HGV's 12.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than LQDT's 21.2x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.1B | $4.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $964M | $10.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 41.67x | 54.63x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 24.33x | 11.35x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 21.19x | 12.87x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.36x | 0.78x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.78x | 3.09x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 19.07x | 17.18x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LQDT leads this category, winning 7 of 7 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LQDT delivers a 14.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $13 for HGV. LQDT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HGV's 5.10x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +14.2% | +13.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.0% | +1.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +60.8% | +5.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +17.3% | +5.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.07x | 5.10x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$160M | $6.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $175M | $571M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $14M | $7.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 1.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LQDT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LQDT five years ago would be worth $14,784 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,975 for HGV. Over the past 12 months, HGV leads with a +27.8% total return vs LQDT's +15.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LQDT at 37.0% vs HGV's 4.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +22.5% | +6.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +15.0% | +27.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +157.1% | +14.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +47.8% | +9.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +508.2% | +88.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +37.0% | +4.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LQDT and HGV each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LQDT is the less volatile stock with a 0.76 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HGV's 1.71 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.76x | 1.71x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $38.83 | $52.08 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $21.67 | $36.79 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +93.4% | +93.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 81.6 | 59.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 159K | 764K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates LQDT as "Buy" and HGV as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 21.4% upside for LQDT (target: $44) vs 3.7% for HGV (target: $50).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $44.00 | $50.40 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 16 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | +15.2% |
HGV leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). LQDT leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
LQDT vs HGV: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LQDT or HGV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Liquidity Services, Inc.
(LQDT) is the stronger pick with 31. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 3% for Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. (HGV). Liquidity Services, Inc. (LQDT) offers the better valuation at 41. 7x trailing P/E (24. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Liquidity Services, Inc. (LQDT) 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.
02Which has the better valuation — LQDT or HGV?
On trailing P/E, Liquidity Services, Inc.
(LQDT) is the cheapest at 41. 7x versus Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. at 54. 6x. On forward P/E, Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LQDT or HGV?
Over the past 5 years, Liquidity Services, Inc.
(LQDT) delivered a total return of +47. 8%, compared to +9. 8% for Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. (HGV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LQDT returned +508. 2% versus HGV's +88. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — LQDT or HGV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Liquidity Services, Inc.
(LQDT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 76β versus Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. 's 1. 71β — meaning HGV is approximately 125% more volatile than LQDT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Liquidity Services, Inc. (LQDT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 5% for Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LQDT or HGV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Liquidity Services, Inc.
(LQDT) is pulling ahead at 31. 2% versus 1. 3% for Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. (HGV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. grew EPS 93. 5% year-over-year, compared to 38. 1% for Liquidity Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LQDT leads at 19. 4% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LQDT or HGV?
Liquidity Services, Inc.
(LQDT) is the more profitable company, earning 5. 9% net margin versus 1. 6% for Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HGV leads at 11. 1% versus 7. 4% for LQDT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HGV leads at 56. 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.
07Is LQDT or HGV more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Hilton Grand Vacations Inc.
(HGV) trades at 11. 4x forward P/E versus 24. 3x for Liquidity Services, Inc. — 13. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LQDT: 21. 4% to $44. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — LQDT or HGV?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is LQDT or HGV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Liquidity Services, Inc.
(LQDT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 76), +508. 2% 10Y return). Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. (HGV) carries a higher beta of 1. 71 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LQDT: +508. 2%, HGV: +88. 1%), 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.
10What are the main differences between LQDT and HGV?
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: LQDT is a small-cap high-growth stock; HGV is a small-cap quality compounder stock. 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.