FC vs STRA

For growth investors, Strategic Education, Inc.

(STRA) is the stronger pick with 4. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 0% for Franklin Covey Co. (FC). Strategic Education, Inc. (STRA) offers the better valuation at 14. 5x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Franklin Covey Co. (FC) a "Buy" — based on 8 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, Strategic Education, Inc.

(STRA) is the cheapest at 14. 5x versus Franklin Covey Co. at 93. 5x. On forward P/E, Strategic Education, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 9x.

Over the past 5 years, Strategic Education, Inc.

(STRA) delivered a total return of +19. 5%, compared to -27. 9% for Franklin Covey Co. (FC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: STRA returned +114. 7% versus FC's +39. 4%. 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), Strategic Education, Inc.

(STRA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 48β versus Franklin Covey Co. 's 1. 36β — meaning FC is approximately 181% more volatile than STRA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Strategic Education, Inc. (STRA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 12% for Franklin Covey Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Strategic Education, Inc.

(STRA) is pulling ahead at 4. 0% versus -7. 0% for Franklin Covey Co. (FC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Strategic Education, Inc. grew EPS 16. 1% year-over-year, compared to -86. 2% for Franklin Covey Co.. Over a 3-year CAGR, STRA leads at 6. 0% 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.

Strategic Education, Inc.

(STRA) is the more profitable company, earning 10. 0% net margin versus 1. 1% for Franklin Covey Co. — meaning it keeps 10. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: STRA leads at 15. 5% versus 2. 1% for FC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FC leads at 76. 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, Strategic Education, Inc.

(STRA) trades at 10. 9x forward P/E versus 59. 9x for Franklin Covey Co. — 48. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FC: 11. 4% to $25. 00.

In this comparison, STRA (3.

2% yield) pays a dividend. FC does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Strategic Education, Inc.

(STRA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 48), 3. 2% yield, +114. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (STRA: +114. 7%, FC: +39. 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (FC (Industrials) and STRA (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

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