HAYW vs PATK

For growth investors, Hayward Holdings, Inc.

(HAYW) is the stronger pick with 6. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 6. 3% for Patrick Industries, Inc. (PATK). Hayward Holdings, Inc. (HAYW) offers the better valuation at 21. 7x trailing P/E (17. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Patrick Industries, Inc. (PATK) 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.

On trailing P/E, Hayward Holdings, Inc.

(HAYW) is the cheapest at 21. 7x versus Patrick Industries, Inc. at 24. 5x. On forward P/E, Hayward Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 17. 2x.

Over the past 5 years, Patrick Industries, Inc.

(PATK) delivered a total return of +56. 6%, compared to -37. 0% for Hayward Holdings, Inc. (HAYW). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PATK returned +395. 2% versus HAYW's -13. 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), Patrick Industries, Inc.

(PATK) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 93β versus Hayward Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 14β — meaning HAYW is approximately 22% more volatile than PATK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Hayward Holdings, Inc. (HAYW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 139% for Patrick Industries, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

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

(HAYW) is pulling ahead at 6. 7% versus 6. 3% for Patrick Industries, Inc. (PATK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hayward Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 25. 9% year-over-year, compared to -5. 1% for Patrick Industries, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HAYW leads at -5. 1% 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.

Hayward Holdings, Inc.

(HAYW) is the more profitable company, earning 13. 5% net margin versus 3. 4% for Patrick Industries, Inc. — meaning it keeps 13. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HAYW leads at 21. 1% versus 7. 0% for PATK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HAYW leads at 45. 6%, 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, Hayward Holdings, Inc.

(HAYW) trades at 17. 2x forward P/E versus 18. 2x for Patrick Industries, Inc. — 1. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PATK: 32. 7% to $126. 50.

In this comparison, PATK (1.

7% yield) pays a dividend. HAYW does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Patrick Industries, Inc.

(PATK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 93), 1. 7% yield, +395. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PATK: +395. 2%, HAYW: -13. 1%), 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 (HAYW (Industrials) and PATK (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

PATK pays a dividend while HAYW 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.