UGRO vs GRWG

For growth investors, GrowGeneration Corp.

(GRWG) is the stronger pick with -14. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -56. 5% for urban-gro, Inc. (UGRO). Analysts rate urban-gro, Inc. (UGRO) a "Buy" — based on 4 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, GrowGeneration Corp.

(GRWG) delivered a total return of -96. 6%, compared to -97. 1% for urban-gro, Inc. (UGRO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GRWG returned -75. 7% versus UGRO's -91. 2%. 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), GrowGeneration Corp.

(GRWG) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 27β versus urban-gro, Inc. 's 1. 44β — meaning UGRO is approximately 13% more volatile than GRWG relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), GrowGeneration Corp.

(GRWG) is pulling ahead at -14. 4% versus -56. 5% for urban-gro, Inc. (UGRO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: GrowGeneration Corp. grew EPS 51. 2% year-over-year, compared to 34. 9% for urban-gro, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GRWG leads at -16. 5% 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.

GrowGeneration Corp.

(GRWG) is the more profitable company, earning -14. 9% net margin versus -129. 4% for urban-gro, Inc. — meaning it keeps -14. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GRWG leads at -15. 7% versus -77. 1% for UGRO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GRWG leads at 26. 8%, 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.

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.

For long-horizon retirement investors, GrowGeneration Corp.

(GRWG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 27)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GRWG: -75. 7%, UGRO: -91. 2%), 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 (UGRO (Industrials) and GRWG (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

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.