BOC vs CCO

For growth investors, Boston Omaha Corporation (BOC) is the stronger pick with 12.

5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 6. 6% for Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO). Analysts rate Boston Omaha Corporation (BOC) a "Buy" — based on 2 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, Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc.

(CCO) delivered a total return of -7. 0%, compared to -60. 0% for Boston Omaha Corporation (BOC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CCO returned -43. 7% versus BOC's -49. 1%. 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), Boston Omaha Corporation (BOC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

30β versus Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 31β — meaning CCO is approximately 330% more volatile than BOC relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Boston Omaha Corporation (BOC) is pulling ahead at 12.

5% versus 6. 6% for Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Boston Omaha Corporation grew EPS 82. 2% year-over-year, compared to 43. 2% for Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BOC leads at 23. 9% 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.

Boston Omaha Corporation (BOC) is the more profitable company, earning -1.

2% net margin versus -6. 5% for Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps -1. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CCO leads at 19. 0% versus -7. 8% for BOC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BOC leads at 68. 3%, 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, Boston Omaha Corporation (BOC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

30)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (BOC: -49. 1%, 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.

Both stocks operate in the Communication Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

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.