Agricultural - Machinery
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs LAUR vs IIPR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Agricultural Inputs
Education & Training Services
REIT - Industrial
HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs LAUR vs IIPR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Agricultural - Machinery | Specialty Retail | Agricultural Inputs | Education & Training Services | REIT - Industrial |
| Market Cap | $5M | $85M | $3.62B | $4.59B | $1.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $146M | $162M | $3.35B | $1.74B | $263M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-65M | $-24M | $90M | $280M | $120M |
| Gross Margin | 10.2% | 26.8% | 31.0% | 26.9% | 60.3% |
| Operating Margin | -35.8% | -15.7% | 11.7% | 24.0% | 46.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 14.2x | 15.3x | 13.2x |
| Total Debt | $170M | $29M | $2.38B | $847M | $394M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $26M | $30M | $37M | $147M | $48M |
HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs LAUR vs IIPR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hydrofarm Holdings … (HYFM) | 100 | 0.2 | -99.8% |
| GrowGeneration Corp. (GRWG) | 100 | 3.5 | -96.5% |
| The Scotts Miracle-… (SMG) | 100 | 31.3 | -68.7% |
| Laureate Education,… (LAUR) | 100 | 220.9 | +120.9% |
| Innovative Industri… (IIPR) | 100 | 30.9 | -69.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs LAUR vs IIPR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HYFM plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
GRWG lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, SMG doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
LAUR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 8.6%, EPS growth -1.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.59, Low D/E 71.2%, current ratio 0.60x
- Beta 0.59, yield 0.0%, current ratio 0.60x
- 8.6% revenue growth vs HYFM's -16.0%
IIPR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 9 yrs, beta 0.92, yield 13.5%
- 436.4% 10Y total return vs LAUR's 216.8%
- Lower P/E (13.2x vs 15.3x)
- 45.6% margin vs HYFM's -44.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.6% revenue growth vs HYFM's -16.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.2x vs 15.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 45.6% margin vs HYFM's -44.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.59 vs GRWG's 1.27 | |
| Dividends | 13.5% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs SMG's 4.2%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +40.7% vs HYFM's -75.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.9% ROA vs HYFM's -16.3%, ROIC 20.3% vs -9.6% |
HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs LAUR vs IIPR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs LAUR vs IIPR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IIPR leads in 2 of 6 categories
LAUR leads 2 • HYFM leads 0 • GRWG leads 0 • SMG leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IIPR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SMG is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.4B annually — 22.9x HYFM's $146M. IIPR is the more profitable business, keeping 45.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to HYFM's -44.5%. On growth, LAUR holds the edge at +15.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $146M | $162M | $3.4B | $1.7B | $263M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$23M | -$14M | $466M | $535M | $197M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$65M | -$24M | $90M | $280M | $120M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$8M | -$10M | $358M | $264M | $144M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +10.2% | +26.8% | +31.0% | +26.9% | +60.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -35.8% | -15.7% | +11.7% | +24.0% | +46.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -44.5% | -14.9% | +2.7% | +16.1% | +45.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.7% | -6.2% | +10.7% | +15.2% | +54.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -33.3% | +1.0% | -15.0% | +15.4% | -3.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -22.7% | +69.2% | -78.5% | -15.4% | -1.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — HYFM and IIPR each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.4x trailing earnings, IIPR trades at a 43% valuation discount to SMG's 25.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LAUR's 9.8x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than SMG's 13.8x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5M | $85M | $3.6B | $4.6B | $1.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $148M | $84M | $6.0B | $5.3B | $2.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.07x | -3.55x | 25.25x | 17.02x | 14.40x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 14.23x | 15.26x | 13.17x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 3.85x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 13.75x | 9.77x | 9.91x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.03x | 0.53x | 1.06x | 2.70x | 6.08x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.02x | 0.87x | — | 4.02x | 0.87x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 13.22x | 17.45x | 9.26x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LAUR leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LAUR delivers a 25.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $25 in annual profit, vs $-32 for HYFM. IIPR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HYFM's 0.76x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SMG scores 7/9 vs HYFM's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -32.3% | -22.9% | — | +25.4% | +6.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -16.3% | -15.2% | +2.9% | +12.9% | +5.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -9.6% | -16.9% | +13.3% | +20.3% | +4.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -12.1% | -18.8% | +17.4% | +26.7% | +5.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.76x | 0.30x | — | 0.71x | 0.21x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $143M | -$929,000 | $2.3B | $701M | $346M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $26M | $30M | $37M | $147M | $48M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $170M | $29M | $2.4B | $847M | $394M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.77x | — | 3.08x | 34.91x | 6.67x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LAUR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LAUR five years ago would be worth $30,043 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $16 for HYFM. Over the past 12 months, LAUR leads with a +40.7% total return vs HYFM's -75.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LAUR at 40.1% vs HYFM's -56.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -35.0% | -7.8% | +6.1% | -3.4% | +18.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -75.4% | +25.7% | +20.7% | +40.7% | +20.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.9% | -62.0% | -3.2% | +175.1% | +14.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.8% | -96.7% | -69.1% | +200.4% | -50.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.8% | -75.7% | +34.9% | +216.8% | +436.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -56.8% | -27.6% | -1.1% | +40.1% | +4.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LAUR and IIPR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LAUR is the less volatile stock with a 0.59 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GRWG's 1.27 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IIPR currently trades 92.2% from its 52-week high vs HYFM's 21.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.91x | 1.27x | 1.10x | 0.59x | 0.92x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.78 | $2.40 | $72.35 | $37.91 | $61.40 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.81 | $0.87 | $52.00 | $21.16 | $44.58 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +21.8% | +59.2% | +86.2% | +84.9% | +92.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.8 | 63.2 | 48.9 | 49.6 | 59.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 41K | 476K | 938K | 1.9M | 303K |
Analyst Outlook
IIPR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SMG as "Buy", LAUR as "Buy", IIPR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 21.2% upside for LAUR (target: $39) vs -22.3% for IIPR (target: $44). For income investors, IIPR offers the higher dividend yield at 13.46% vs SMG's 4.21%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $72.00 | $39.00 | $44.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 17 | 11 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +4.2% | +0.0% | +13.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | 9 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.63 | $0.00 | $7.62 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.5% | +4.7% | +1.2% |
IIPR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). LAUR leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 2 tied.
HYFM vs GRWG vs SMG vs LAUR vs IIPR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HYFM or GRWG or SMG or LAUR or IIPR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Laureate Education, Inc.
(LAUR) is the stronger pick with 8. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -16. 0% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. (HYFM). Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR) offers the better valuation at 14. 4x trailing P/E (13. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) 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.
02Which has the better valuation — HYFM or GRWG or SMG or LAUR or IIPR?
On trailing P/E, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.
(IIPR) is the cheapest at 14. 4x versus The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company at 25. 3x. On forward P/E, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. is actually cheaper at 13. 2x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HYFM or GRWG or SMG or LAUR or IIPR?
Over the past 5 years, Laureate Education, Inc.
(LAUR) delivered a total return of +200. 4%, compared to -99. 8% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. (HYFM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IIPR returned +436. 4% versus HYFM's -99. 8%. 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 — HYFM or GRWG or SMG or LAUR or IIPR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Laureate Education, Inc.
(LAUR) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 59β versus GrowGeneration Corp. 's 1. 27β — meaning GRWG is approximately 115% more volatile than LAUR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 21% versus 76% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HYFM or GRWG or SMG or LAUR or IIPR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Laureate Education, Inc.
(LAUR) is pulling ahead at 8. 6% versus -16. 0% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. (HYFM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company grew EPS 504. 9% year-over-year, compared to -28. 8% for Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LAUR leads at 11. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — HYFM or GRWG or SMG or LAUR or IIPR?
Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.
(IIPR) is the more profitable company, earning 43. 0% net margin versus -35. 1% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 43. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IIPR leads at 46. 7% versus -27. 4% for HYFM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — IIPR leads at 88. 7%, 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 HYFM or GRWG or SMG or LAUR or IIPR more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.
(IIPR) trades at 13. 2x forward P/E versus 15. 3x for Laureate Education, Inc. — 2. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LAUR: 21. 2% to $39. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — HYFM or GRWG or SMG or LAUR or IIPR?
In this comparison, IIPR (13.
5% yield), SMG (4. 2% yield) pay a dividend. HYFM, GRWG, LAUR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HYFM or GRWG or SMG or LAUR or IIPR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.
(IIPR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 92), 13. 5% yield, +436. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (IIPR: +436. 4%, GRWG: -75. 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.
10What are the main differences between HYFM and GRWG and SMG and LAUR and IIPR?
These companies operate in different sectors (HYFM (Industrials) and GRWG (Consumer Cyclical) and SMG (Basic Materials) and LAUR (Consumer Defensive) and IIPR (Real Estate)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: HYFM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GRWG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SMG is a small-cap income-oriented stock; LAUR is a small-cap deep-value stock; IIPR is a small-cap deep-value stock. SMG, IIPR pay a dividend while HYFM, GRWG, LAUR 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.