ACVA vs VRM vs CVNA vs KAR

For growth investors, Carvana Co.

(CVNA) is the stronger pick with 48. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -98. 7% for Vroom, Inc. (VRM). OPENLANE, Inc. (KAR) offers the better valuation at 16. 7x trailing P/E (19. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate ACV Auctions Inc. (ACVA) a "Buy" — based on 17 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 trailing P/E, OPENLANE, Inc.

(KAR) is the cheapest at 16. 7x versus Carvana Co. at 47. 4x. On forward P/E, OPENLANE, Inc. is actually cheaper at 19. 3x.

Over the past 5 years, OPENLANE, Inc.

(KAR) delivered a total return of +61. 6%, compared to -99. 6% for Vroom, Inc. (VRM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CVNA returned +35. 1% versus VRM's -99. 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), OPENLANE, Inc.

(KAR) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 98β versus Carvana Co. 's 2. 14β — meaning CVNA is approximately 118% more volatile than KAR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Carvana Co. (CVNA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 15% versus 93% for OPENLANE, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Carvana Co.

(CVNA) is pulling ahead at 48. 6% versus -98. 7% for Vroom, Inc. (VRM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Carvana Co. grew EPS 431. 4% year-over-year, compared to 18. 8% for ACV Auctions Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ACVA leads at 21. 7% 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.

OPENLANE, Inc.

(KAR) is the more profitable company, earning 9. 2% net margin versus -1422. 3% for Vroom, Inc. — meaning it keeps 9. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KAR leads at 10. 2% versus -1092. 2% for VRM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — VRM leads at 100. 0%, 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, OPENLANE, Inc.

(KAR) trades at 19. 3x forward P/E versus 51. 4x for Carvana Co. — 32. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ACVA: 38. 5% to $9. 00.

In this comparison, KAR (1.

3% yield) pays a dividend. ACVA, VRM, CVNA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, OPENLANE, Inc.

(KAR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 98), 1. 3% yield). Carvana Co. (CVNA) carries a higher beta of 2. 14 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (KAR: +99. 2%, CVNA: +35. 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.

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: ACVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; VRM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CVNA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; KAR is a small-cap deep-value stock. KAR pays a dividend while ACVA, VRM, CVNA 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.