Compare Stocks

5 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

BGMS vs HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs IIPR

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
BGMS
Bio Green Med Solution, Inc.

Medical - Pharmaceuticals

HealthcareNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$21K
5Y Perf.-31.0%
HYFM
Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc.

Agricultural - Machinery

IndustrialsNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$5M
5Y Perf.-99.8%
GRWG
GrowGeneration Corp.

Specialty Retail

Consumer CyclicalNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$82M
5Y Perf.-96.6%
SMG
The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company

Agricultural Inputs

Basic MaterialsNYSE • US
Market Cap$3.46B
5Y Perf.-70.1%
IIPR
Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.

REIT - Industrial

Real EstateNYSE • US
Market Cap$1.59B
5Y Perf.-69.6%

BGMS vs HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs IIPR — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
BGMS logoBGMS
HYFM logoHYFM
GRWG logoGRWG
SMG logoSMG
IIPR logoIIPR
IndustryMedical - PharmaceuticalsAgricultural - MachinerySpecialty RetailAgricultural InputsREIT - Industrial
Market Cap$21K$5M$82M$3.46B$1.59B
Revenue (TTM)$81K$146M$162M$3.35B$263M
Net Income (TTM)$-5M$-65M$-24M$90M$120M
Gross Margin18.5%10.2%19.8%31.0%60.3%
Operating Margin-113.2%-35.8%-15.7%11.7%46.7%
Forward P/E13.6x13.1x
Total Debt$0.00$170M$29M$2.38B$394M
Cash & Equiv.$3M$26M$30M$37M$48M

BGMS vs HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs IIPRLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

BGMS
HYFM
GRWG
SMG
IIPR
StockDec 20May 26Return
Hydrofarm Holdings … (HYFM)1000.2-99.8%
GrowGeneration Corp. (GRWG)1003.4-96.6%
The Scotts Miracle-… (SMG)10029.9-70.1%
Innovative Industri… (IIPR)10030.4-69.6%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: BGMS vs HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs IIPR

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: IIPR leads in 4 of 7 categories (5-stock set), making it the strongest pick for valuation and capital efficiency and profitability and margin quality. Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for capital preservation and lower volatility. GRWG and SMG also each lead in at least one category. This set spans 3 sectors — these stocks serve different portfolio roles, not just different price points.
BGMS
Bio Green Med Solution, Inc.
The Healthcare Pick

Among these 5 stocks, BGMS doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.

Best for: healthcare exposure
HYFM
Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc.
The Defensive Pick

HYFM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.

  • Lower volatility, beta 0.73, Low D/E 75.8%, current ratio 2.72x
  • Beta 0.73 vs BGMS's 1.88
Best for: sleep-well-at-night
GRWG
GrowGeneration Corp.
The Momentum Pick

GRWG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.

  • +22.3% vs BGMS's -84.4%
Best for: momentum
SMG
The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company
The Growth Play

SMG is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.

  • Rev growth -3.9%, EPS growth 5.0%, 3Y rev CAGR -4.5%
  • -3.9% revenue growth vs BGMS's -89.8%
Best for: growth exposure
IIPR
Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.
The Real Estate Income Play

IIPR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.

  • Dividend streak 9 yrs, beta 0.91, yield 13.7%
  • 432.0% 10Y total return vs SMG's 32.7%
  • Beta 0.91, yield 13.7%, current ratio 0.15x
  • Lower P/E (13.1x vs 13.6x)
Best for: income & stability and long-term compounding
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthSMG logoSMG-3.9% revenue growth vs BGMS's -89.8%
ValueIIPR logoIIPRLower P/E (13.1x vs 13.6x)
Quality / MarginsIIPR logoIIPR45.6% margin vs BGMS's -67.1%
Stability / SafetyHYFM logoHYFMBeta 0.73 vs BGMS's 1.88
DividendsIIPR logoIIPR13.7% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs SMG's 4.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
Momentum (1Y)GRWG logoGRWG+22.3% vs BGMS's -84.4%
Efficiency (ROA)IIPR logoIIPR5.1% ROA vs BGMS's -106.7%

BGMS vs HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs IIPR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

BGMSBio Green Med Solution, Inc.

Segment breakdown not available.

HYFMHydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc.
FY 2024
Shipping and Handling
100.0%$8M
GRWGGrowGeneration Corp.
FY 2025
Storage Solutions
100.0%$28M
SMGThe Scotts Miracle-Gro Company
FY 2025
Other Segments
60.5%$254M
Hawthorne
39.5%$166M
IIPRInnovative Industrial Properties, Inc.

Segment breakdown not available.

BGMS vs HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs IIPR — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLIIPRLAGGINGSMG

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

IIPR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

SMG is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.4B annually — 41367.9x BGMS's $81,000. IIPR is the more profitable business, keeping 45.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BGMS's -67.1%. On growth, BGMS holds the edge at +7.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricBGMS logoBGMSBio Green Med Sol…HYFM logoHYFMHydrofarm Holding…GRWG logoGRWGGrowGeneration Co…SMG logoSMGThe Scotts Miracl…IIPR logoIIPRInnovative Indust…
RevenueTrailing 12 months$81,000$146M$162M$3.4B$263M
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax-$9M-$23M-$14M$466M$197M
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit-$5M-$65M-$24M$90M$120M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex-$6M-$8M-$10M$358M$144M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+18.5%+10.2%+19.8%+31.0%+60.3%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue-113.2%-35.8%-15.7%+11.7%+46.7%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue-67.1%-44.5%-14.9%+2.7%+45.6%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue-75.2%-5.7%-6.2%+10.7%+54.7%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+7.1%-33.3%+1.0%-15.0%-3.8%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+99.4%-22.7%+69.2%-78.5%-1.0%
IIPR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

IIPR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

At 14.2x trailing earnings, IIPR trades at a 41% valuation discount to SMG's 24.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, IIPR's 9.8x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than SMG's 13.4x.

MetricBGMS logoBGMSBio Green Med Sol…HYFM logoHYFMHydrofarm Holding…GRWG logoGRWGGrowGeneration Co…SMG logoSMGThe Scotts Miracl…IIPR logoIIPRInnovative Indust…
Market CapShares × price$20,975$5M$82M$3.5B$1.6B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash-$3M$148M$81M$5.8B$1.9B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS-0.00x-0.07x-3.42x24.12x14.19x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.13.60x13.13x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate3.79x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple13.38x9.79x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue0.49x0.02x0.51x1.01x5.99x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share0.02x0.84x0.86x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF12.62x9.12x
IIPR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

IIPR leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

IIPR delivers a 6.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-187 for BGMS. IIPR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HYFM's 0.76x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SMG scores 7/9 vs BGMS's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricBGMS logoBGMSBio Green Med Sol…HYFM logoHYFMHydrofarm Holding…GRWG logoGRWGGrowGeneration Co…SMG logoSMGThe Scotts Miracl…IIPR logoIIPRInnovative Indust…
ROE (TTM)Return on equity-187.3%-32.3%-22.9%+6.4%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets-106.7%-16.3%-15.2%+2.9%+5.1%
ROICReturn on invested capital-9.6%-16.1%+13.3%+4.3%
ROCEReturn on capital employed-12.1%-17.9%+17.4%+5.8%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–913574
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage0.76x0.30x0.21x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash-$3M$143M-$929,000$2.3B$346M
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$3M$26M$30M$37M$48M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$0$170M$29M$2.4B$394M
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense-3.77x3.08x6.67x
IIPR leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

IIPR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in IIPR five years ago would be worth $5,496 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $17 for HYFM. Over the past 12 months, GRWG leads with a +22.3% total return vs BGMS's -84.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IIPR at 4.0% vs HYFM's -55.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricBGMS logoBGMSBio Green Med Sol…HYFM logoHYFMHydrofarm Holding…GRWG logoGRWGGrowGeneration Co…SMG logoSMGThe Scotts Miracl…IIPR logoIIPRInnovative Indust…
YTD ReturnYear-to-date-33.3%-37.5%-11.0%+1.3%+16.6%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months-84.4%-73.8%+22.3%+9.1%+13.4%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-84.4%-91.0%-66.1%+2.3%+12.6%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-84.4%-99.8%-96.3%-68.1%-45.0%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-84.4%-99.8%-76.6%+32.7%+432.0%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return-46.2%-55.2%-30.3%+0.8%+4.0%
IIPR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — HYFM and IIPR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

HYFM is the less volatile stock with a 0.73 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BGMS's 1.88 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IIPR currently trades 90.8% from its 52-week high vs BGMS's 14.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricBGMS logoBGMSBio Green Med Sol…HYFM logoHYFMHydrofarm Holding…GRWG logoGRWGGrowGeneration Co…SMG logoSMGThe Scotts Miracl…IIPR logoIIPRInnovative Indust…
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5001.88x0.73x1.15x1.12x0.91x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$6.70$4.78$2.40$72.35$61.40
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$0.73$0.81$0.87$52.00$44.58
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+14.0%+20.9%+57.1%+82.3%+90.8%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10039.447.663.942.455.6
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded99K42K486K962K291K
Evenly matched — HYFM and IIPR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

IIPR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: SMG as "Buy", IIPR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 51.8% upside for IIPR (target: $85) vs 22.0% for SMG (target: $73). For income investors, IIPR offers the higher dividend yield at 13.67% vs SMG's 4.41%.

MetricBGMS logoBGMSBio Green Med Sol…HYFM logoHYFMHydrofarm Holding…GRWG logoGRWGGrowGeneration Co…SMG logoSMGThe Scotts Miracl…IIPR logoIIPRInnovative Indust…
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellBuyHold
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$72.67$84.67
# AnalystsCovering analysts1711
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+4.4%+13.7%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises0109
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$2.63$7.62
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap0.0%0.0%+0.3%+0.5%+1.3%
IIPR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

IIPR leads in 5 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics. 1 category is tied.

Best OverallInnovative Industrial Prope… (IIPR)Leads 5 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

BGMS vs HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs IIPR: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is BGMS or HYFM or GRWG or SMG or IIPR a better buy right now?

For growth investors, The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) is the stronger pick with -3.

9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -89. 8% for Bio Green Med Solution, Inc. (BGMS). Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR) offers the better valuation at 14. 2x trailing P/E (13. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — BGMS or HYFM or GRWG or SMG or IIPR?

On trailing P/E, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.

(IIPR) is the cheapest at 14. 2x versus The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company at 24. 1x. On forward P/E, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. is actually cheaper at 13. 1x.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — BGMS or HYFM or GRWG or SMG or IIPR?

Over the past 5 years, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.

(IIPR) delivered a total return of -45. 0%, compared to -99. 8% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. (HYFM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IIPR returned +432. 0% versus HYFM's -99. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — BGMS or HYFM or GRWG or SMG or IIPR?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc.

(HYFM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 73β versus Bio Green Med Solution, Inc. 's 1. 88β — meaning BGMS is approximately 156% more volatile than HYFM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 21% versus 76% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — BGMS or HYFM or GRWG or SMG or IIPR?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) is pulling ahead at -3.

9% versus -89. 8% for Bio Green Med Solution, Inc. (BGMS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company grew EPS 504. 9% year-over-year, compared to -28. 8% for Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, IIPR leads at -1. 3% 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — BGMS or HYFM or GRWG or SMG or IIPR?

Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.

(IIPR) is the more profitable company, earning 43. 0% net margin versus -260. 7% for Bio Green Med Solution, Inc. — meaning it keeps 43. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IIPR leads at 46. 7% versus -279. 2% for BGMS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BGMS 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.

07

Is BGMS or HYFM or GRWG or SMG or IIPR more undervalued right now?

On forward earnings alone, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.

(IIPR) trades at 13. 1x forward P/E versus 13. 6x for The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company — 0. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IIPR: 51. 8% to $84. 67.

08

Which pays a better dividend — BGMS or HYFM or GRWG or SMG or IIPR?

In this comparison, IIPR (13.

7% yield), SMG (4. 4% yield) pay a dividend. BGMS, HYFM, GRWG do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

09

Is BGMS or HYFM or GRWG or SMG or IIPR better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.

(IIPR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 91), 13. 7% yield, +432. 0% 10Y return). Bio Green Med Solution, Inc. (BGMS) carries a higher beta of 1. 88 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (IIPR: +432. 0%, BGMS: -84. 4%), 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.

10

What are the main differences between BGMS and HYFM and GRWG and SMG and IIPR?

These companies operate in different sectors (BGMS (Healthcare) and HYFM (Industrials) and GRWG (Consumer Cyclical) and SMG (Basic Materials) and IIPR (Real Estate)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: BGMS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HYFM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GRWG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SMG is a small-cap income-oriented stock; IIPR is a small-cap deep-value stock. SMG, IIPR pay a dividend while BGMS, HYFM, GRWG 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.

Find Stocks Like These

Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.

Stocks Like

BGMS

High-Growth Disruptor

  • Sector: Healthcare
  • Market Cap > $2B
  • Revenue Growth > 355%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

HYFM

Quality Business

  • Sector: Industrials
  • Market Cap > $100B
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

GRWG

Quality Business

  • Sector: Consumer Cyclical
  • Market Cap > $100B
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

SMG

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Basic Materials
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Gross Margin > 18%
  • Dividend Yield > 1.7%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

IIPR

Dividend Mega-Cap Quality

  • Sector: Real Estate
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 27%
  • Dividend Yield > 5.4%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform BGMS and HYFM and GRWG and SMG and IIPR on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(BGMS: 710.0% · HYFM: -33.3%)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.