Auto - Dealerships
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
GORV vs CWH
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Dealerships
GORV vs CWH — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Dealerships |
| Market Cap | $2M | $483M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $547M | $6.31B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-213M | $-94M |
| Gross Margin | 23.4% | 29.3% |
| Operating Margin | -29.5% | 2.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 11.3x |
| Total Debt | $494M | $2.67B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $25M | $215M |
GORV vs CWH — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | Dec 25 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazydays Holdings, … (GORV) | 100 | 0.2 | -99.8% |
| Camping World Holdi… (CWH) | 100 | 52.8 | -47.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GORV vs CWH
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
GORV is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta -0.13
- Lower volatility, beta -0.13, current ratio 0.93x
- Lower D/E ratio (5.5% vs 7.2%)
CWH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 4.4%, EPS growth -78.8%, 3Y rev CAGR -2.9%
- -21.7% 10Y total return vs GORV's -99.9%
- Beta 2.35, yield 6.6%, current ratio 1.20x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 4.4% revenue growth vs GORV's -19.5% | |
| Quality / Margins | -1.5% margin vs GORV's -38.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Lower D/E ratio (5.5% vs 7.2%) | |
| Dividends | 6.6% yield; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | -42.0% vs GORV's -91.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -1.8% ROA vs GORV's -63.8%, ROIC 4.0% vs -10.6% |
GORV vs CWH — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
GORV vs CWH — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CWH leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CWH is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.3B annually — 11.5x GORV's $547M. CWH is the more profitable business, keeping -1.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GORV's -38.8%. On growth, CWH holds the edge at -4.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $547M | $6.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$144M | $274M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$213M | -$94M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$20M | -$156M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +23.4% | +29.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -29.5% | +2.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -38.8% | -1.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -3.7% | -2.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -52.5% | -4.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +46.5% | -23.8% |
Valuation Metrics
GORV leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2M | $483M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $471M | $2.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.00x | -5.32x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 11.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 10.71x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.00x | 0.08x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 1.28x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 0.02x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CWH leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CWH delivers a -21.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-22 in annual profit, vs $-108 for GORV. GORV carries lower financial leverage with a 5.52x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CWH's 7.17x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GORV scores 3/9 vs CWH's 2/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -108.1% | -21.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -63.8% | -1.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -10.6% | +4.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -26.9% | +5.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 5.52x | 7.17x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $470M | $2.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $25M | $215M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $494M | $2.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -4.97x | 1.14x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CWH leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CWH five years ago would be worth $2,990 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6 for GORV. Over the past 12 months, CWH leads with a -42.0% total return vs GORV's -91.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CWH at -27.4% vs GORV's -89.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | — | -21.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -91.2% | -42.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | -61.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | -70.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | -21.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -89.1% | -27.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — GORV and CWH each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GORV is the less volatile stock with a -0.13 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CWH's 2.35 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CWH currently trades 38.7% from its 52-week high vs GORV's 3.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.13x | 2.35x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $14.14 | $19.64 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.41 | $5.70 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +3.0% | +38.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 24.2 | 55.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 0 | 3.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
CWH is the only dividend payer here at 6.59% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $12.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 24 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +6.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.50 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
CWH leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). GORV leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
GORV vs CWH: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GORV or CWH a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Camping World Holdings, Inc.
(CWH) is the stronger pick with 4. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -19. 5% for Lazydays Holdings, Inc. (GORV). Analysts rate Camping World Holdings, Inc. (CWH) a "Buy" — based on 24 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.
02Which is the better long-term investment — GORV or CWH?
Over the past 5 years, Camping World Holdings, Inc.
(CWH) delivered a total return of -70. 1%, compared to -99. 9% for Lazydays Holdings, Inc. (GORV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CWH returned -21. 7% versus GORV's -99. 9%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — GORV or CWH?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Lazydays Holdings, Inc.
(GORV) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 13β versus Camping World Holdings, Inc. 's 2. 35β — meaning CWH is approximately -1858% more volatile than GORV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lazydays Holdings, Inc. (GORV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 7% for Camping World Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — GORV or CWH?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Camping World Holdings, Inc.
(CWH) is pulling ahead at 4. 4% versus -19. 5% for Lazydays Holdings, Inc. (GORV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Lazydays Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 0. 8% year-over-year, compared to -78. 8% for Camping World Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CWH leads at -2. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — GORV or CWH?
Camping World Holdings, Inc.
(CWH) is the more profitable company, earning -1. 4% net margin versus -18. 8% for Lazydays Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps -1. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CWH leads at 2. 8% versus -11. 4% for GORV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CWH leads at 29. 5%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — GORV or CWH?
In this comparison, CWH (6.
6% yield) pays a dividend. GORV does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is GORV or CWH better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Lazydays Holdings, Inc.
(GORV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 13)). Camping World Holdings, Inc. (CWH) carries a higher beta of 2. 35 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (GORV: -99. 9%, CWH: -21. 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.
08What are the main differences between GORV and CWH?
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: GORV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CWH is a small-cap income-oriented stock. CWH pays a dividend while GORV 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.