EYE vs AMSF

For growth investors, National Vision Holdings, Inc.

(EYE) is the stronger pick with 9. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 6% for AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF). AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) offers the better valuation at 12. 3x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate National Vision Holdings, Inc. (EYE) 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.

On trailing P/E, AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) is the cheapest at 12. 3x versus National Vision Holdings, Inc. at 61. 7x. On forward P/E, AMERISAFE, Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x.

Over the past 5 years, AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) delivered a total return of -18. 9%, compared to -55. 4% for National Vision Holdings, Inc. (EYE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AMSF returned +31. 8% versus EYE's -18. 0%. 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), AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 23β versus National Vision Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 62β — meaning EYE is approximately 600% more volatile than AMSF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 80% for National Vision Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), National Vision Holdings, Inc.

(EYE) is pulling ahead at 9. 0% versus 2. 6% for AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: National Vision Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 202. 8% year-over-year, compared to -14. 5% for AMERISAFE, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, EYE leads at 6. 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.

AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) is the more profitable company, earning 14. 9% net margin versus 1. 5% for National Vision Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 14. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AMSF leads at 18. 6% versus 3. 1% for EYE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EYE leads at 54. 2%, 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, AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 32. 6x for National Vision Holdings, Inc. — 18. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EYE: 54. 2% to $35. 20.

In this comparison, AMSF (8.

4% yield) pays a dividend. EYE does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, AMERISAFE, Inc.

(AMSF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 23), 8. 4% yield). National Vision Holdings, Inc. (EYE) carries a higher beta of 1. 62 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (AMSF: +31. 8%, EYE: -18. 0%), 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 (EYE (Consumer Cyclical) and AMSF (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: EYE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMSF is a small-cap deep-value stock. AMSF pays a dividend while EYE does 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.