Industrial - Distribution
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HTLM vs FLXS vs ETH vs LOVE vs HOFT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
Asset Management - Cryptocurrency
Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
HTLM vs FLXS vs ETH vs LOVE vs HOFT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial - Distribution | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances | Asset Management - Cryptocurrency | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances |
| Market Cap | $165M | $295M | $554M | $228M | $138M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $235M | $458M | $615M | $690M | $376M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $10M | $22M | $47M | $13M | $-13M |
| Gross Margin | 27.7% | 23.2% | 60.5% | 57.7% | 22.4% |
| Operating Margin | 4.8% | 6.1% | 10.1% | 6.3% | -4.8% |
| Forward P/E | 13.1x | 11.8x | 8.6x | 26.2x | — |
| Total Debt | $14M | $59M | $124M | $183M | $70M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $21M | $40M | $76M | $84M | $6M |
HTLM vs FLXS vs ETH vs LOVE vs HOFT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| HomesToLife Ltd (HTLM) | 100 | 41.8 | -58.2% |
| Flexsteel Industrie… (FLXS) | 100 | 95.9 | -4.1% |
| Grayscale Ethereum … (ETH) | 100 | 93.2 | -6.8% |
| The Lovesac Company (LOVE) | 100 | 54.7 | -45.3% |
| Hooker Furnishings … (HOFT) | 100 | 83.0 | -17.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HTLM vs FLXS vs ETH vs LOVE vs HOFT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HTLM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 91.6%, EPS growth 227.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 264.5%
- 91.6% revenue growth vs HOFT's -8.3%
- Beta 0.21 vs ETH's 2.91
- 15.4% ROA vs HOFT's -4.6%, ROIC 123.8% vs -5.1%
FLXS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 51.4% 10Y total return vs ETH's -18.8%
- +80.1% vs HTLM's -48.7%
ETH is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and quality is your priority.
- Better valuation composite
- 8.4% margin vs HOFT's -3.4%
Among these 5 stocks, LOVE doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
HOFT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 0.73, yield 7.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.73, Low D/E 34.4%, current ratio 3.53x
- Beta 0.73, yield 7.3%, current ratio 3.53x
- 7.3% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs FLXS's 1.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 91.6% revenue growth vs HOFT's -8.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.4% margin vs HOFT's -3.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.21 vs ETH's 2.91 | |
| Dividends | 7.3% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs FLXS's 1.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +80.1% vs HTLM's -48.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 15.4% ROA vs HOFT's -4.6%, ROIC 123.8% vs -5.1% |
HTLM vs FLXS vs ETH vs LOVE vs HOFT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
HTLM vs FLXS vs ETH vs LOVE vs HOFT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HOFT leads in 2 of 6 categories
ETH leads 1 • HTLM leads 1 • FLXS leads 1 • LOVE leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ETH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LOVE is the larger business by revenue, generating $690M annually — 2.9x HTLM's $235M. ETH is the more profitable business, keeping 8.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to HOFT's -3.4%. On growth, FLXS holds the edge at +9.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $235M | $458M | $615M | $690M | $376M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $15M | $31M | $70M | $58M | -$9M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $10M | $22M | $47M | $13M | -$13M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $3M | $28M | $20M | -$11M | -$14M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +27.7% | +23.2% | +60.5% | +57.7% | +22.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.8% | +6.1% | +10.1% | +6.3% | -4.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.4% | +4.8% | +8.4% | +1.9% | -3.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +1.3% | +6.1% | +0.0% | -1.5% | -3.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +9.8% | — | +2.5% | -13.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -27.2% | -28.1% | -18.4% | -63.2% |
Valuation Metrics
HOFT leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.8x trailing earnings, ETH trades at a 52% valuation discount to LOVE's 22.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, HTLM's 9.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than LOVE's 11.5x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $165M | $295M | $554M | $228M | $138M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $157M | $314M | $602M | $327M | $202M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.11x | 15.54x | 10.84x | 22.64x | -10.72x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 11.79x | 8.62x | 26.24x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.25x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.41x | 10.38x | 9.71x | 11.54x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.57x | 0.67x | 0.90x | 0.34x | 0.35x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.60x | 1.87x | 1.16x | 1.21x | 0.66x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 17.42x | 8.74x | 9999.00x | 13.06x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
HTLM leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HTLM delivers a 80.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $80 in annual profit, vs $-7 for HOFT. ETH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.26x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LOVE's 0.85x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FLXS scores 8/9 vs HOFT's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +80.4% | +12.2% | +10.0% | +6.5% | -6.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +15.4% | +7.5% | +6.4% | +2.6% | -4.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +123.8% | +9.9% | +7.6% | +3.3% | -5.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +92.6% | +12.3% | +10.5% | +3.6% | -6.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.64x | 0.35x | 0.26x | 0.85x | 0.34x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$7M | $19M | $47M | $99M | $64M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $21M | $40M | $76M | $84M | $6M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $14M | $59M | $124M | $183M | $70M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 17.25x | 380.21x | 721.00x | — | -13.29x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FLXS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FLXS five years ago would be worth $11,954 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,157 for LOVE. Over the past 12 months, FLXS leads with a +80.1% total return vs HTLM's -48.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FLXS at 50.7% vs HTLM's -22.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -21.5% | +38.7% | -26.1% | +8.2% | +16.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -48.7% | +80.1% | +28.9% | -23.5% | +57.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -52.7% | +242.4% | -33.4% | -40.1% | +1.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -52.7% | +19.5% | -30.3% | -78.4% | -56.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -52.7% | +51.4% | -18.8% | -34.9% | -20.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -22.1% | +50.7% | -12.7% | -15.7% | +0.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — HTLM and FLXS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HTLM is the less volatile stock with a 0.21 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ETH's 2.91 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FLXS currently trades 92.0% from its 52-week high vs HTLM's 43.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.09x | 1.45x | 2.83x | 1.34x | 0.66x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.19 | $59.95 | $45.78 | $21.90 | $15.99 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.56 | $29.38 | $16.85 | $10.33 | $8.46 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +43.8% | +92.0% | +47.6% | +71.3% | +80.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.8 | 60.4 | 55.8 | 53.7 | 46.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 14K | 47K | 4.6M | 299K | 43K |
Analyst Outlook
HOFT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ETH as "Hold", LOVE as "Buy", HOFT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 44.0% upside for LOVE (target: $23) vs -2.1% for FLXS (target: $54). For income investors, HOFT offers the higher dividend yield at 7.28% vs FLXS's 1.14%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $54.00 | — | $22.50 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 10 | 11 | 2 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.1% | +0.0% | — | +7.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 0 | — | 10 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.63 | $0.00 | — | $0.94 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.0% | 0.0% | +8.7% | 0.0% |
HOFT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). ETH leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
HTLM vs FLXS vs ETH vs LOVE vs HOFT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HTLM or FLXS or ETH or LOVE or HOFT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, HomesToLife Ltd (HTLM) is the stronger pick with 91.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 3% for Hooker Furnishings Corporation (HOFT). Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust (ETH) offers the better valuation at 10. 8x trailing P/E (8. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Lovesac Company (LOVE) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 has the better valuation — HTLM or FLXS or ETH or LOVE or HOFT?
On trailing P/E, Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust (ETH) is the cheapest at 10.
8x versus The Lovesac Company at 22. 6x. On forward P/E, Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust is actually cheaper at 8. 6x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HTLM or FLXS or ETH or LOVE or HOFT?
Over the past 5 years, Flexsteel Industries, Inc.
(FLXS) delivered a total return of +19. 5%, compared to -78. 4% for The Lovesac Company (LOVE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FLXS returned +53. 0% versus HTLM's -54. 6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — HTLM or FLXS or ETH or LOVE or HOFT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), HomesToLife Ltd (HTLM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
09β versus Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust's 2. 83β — meaning ETH is approximately 3022% more volatile than HTLM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust (ETH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 26% versus 85% for The Lovesac Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HTLM or FLXS or ETH or LOVE or HOFT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), HomesToLife Ltd (HTLM) is pulling ahead at 91.
6% versus -8. 3% for Hooker Furnishings Corporation (HOFT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: HomesToLife Ltd grew EPS 227. 3% year-over-year, compared to -236. 4% for Hooker Furnishings Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, HTLM leads at 264. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — HTLM or FLXS or ETH or LOVE or HOFT?
Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust (ETH) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
4% net margin versus -3. 1% for Hooker Furnishings Corporation — meaning it keeps 8. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ETH leads at 10. 1% versus -4. 6% for HOFT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ETH leads at 60. 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.
07Is HTLM or FLXS or ETH or LOVE or HOFT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust (ETH) trades at 8.
6x forward P/E versus 26. 2x for The Lovesac Company — 17. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LOVE: 44. 0% to $22. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — HTLM or FLXS or ETH or LOVE or HOFT?
In this comparison, HOFT (7.
3% yield), FLXS (1. 1% yield) pay a dividend. HTLM, ETH, LOVE do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HTLM or FLXS or ETH or LOVE or HOFT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Hooker Furnishings Corporation (HOFT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
66), 7. 3% yield). Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust (ETH) carries a higher beta of 2. 83 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (HOFT: -18. 7%, ETH: -18. 2%), 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.
10What are the main differences between HTLM and FLXS and ETH and LOVE and HOFT?
These companies operate in different sectors (HTLM (Industrials) and FLXS (Consumer Cyclical) and ETH (Financial Services) and LOVE (Consumer Cyclical) and HOFT (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: HTLM is a small-cap high-growth stock; FLXS is a small-cap deep-value stock; ETH is a small-cap deep-value stock; LOVE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HOFT is a small-cap income-oriented stock. FLXS, HOFT pay a dividend while HTLM, ETH, LOVE do 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.