Agricultural - Machinery
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
HYFM vs LAUR vs STRA vs GRWG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Education & Training Services
Education & Training Services
Specialty Retail
HYFM vs LAUR vs STRA vs GRWG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Agricultural - Machinery | Education & Training Services | Education & Training Services | Specialty Retail |
| Market Cap | $5M | $4.59B | $1.80B | $85M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $146M | $1.74B | $1.27B | $162M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-65M | $280M | $130M | $-24M |
| Gross Margin | 10.2% | 26.9% | 37.4% | 26.8% |
| Operating Margin | -35.8% | 24.0% | 14.0% | -15.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | 15.3x | 11.0x | — |
| Total Debt | $170M | $847M | $109M | $29M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $26M | $147M | $141M | $30M |
HYFM vs LAUR vs STRA vs GRWG — 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% |
| Laureate Education,… (LAUR) | 100 | 220.9 | +120.9% |
| Strategic Education… (STRA) | 100 | 83.0 | -17.0% |
| GrowGeneration Corp. (GRWG) | 100 | 3.5 | -96.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HYFM vs LAUR vs STRA vs GRWG
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.
LAUR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 8.6%, EPS growth -1.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.1%
- 216.8% 10Y total return vs STRA's 114.9%
- 8.6% revenue growth vs HYFM's -16.0%
- 16.1% margin vs HYFM's -44.5%
STRA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.48, yield 3.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, Low D/E 6.6%, current ratio 1.27x
- Beta 0.48, yield 3.2%, current ratio 1.27x
- Better valuation composite
GRWG lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.6% revenue growth vs HYFM's -16.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 16.1% margin vs HYFM's -44.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.48 vs GRWG's 1.27, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.2% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful 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 LAUR vs STRA vs GRWG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HYFM vs LAUR vs STRA vs GRWG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LAUR leads in 3 of 6 categories
STRA leads 2 • HYFM leads 0 • GRWG leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LAUR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LAUR is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.7B annually — 11.9x HYFM's $146M. LAUR is the more profitable business, keeping 16.1% 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 | $1.7B | $1.3B | $162M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$23M | $535M | $216M | -$14M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$65M | $280M | $130M | -$24M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$8M | $264M | $174M | -$10M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +10.2% | +26.9% | +37.4% | +26.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -35.8% | +24.0% | +14.0% | -15.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -44.5% | +16.1% | +10.2% | -14.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.7% | +15.2% | +13.7% | -6.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -33.3% | +15.4% | +0.8% | +1.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -22.7% | -15.4% | +19.4% | +69.2% |
Valuation Metrics
STRA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.6x trailing earnings, STRA trades at a 14% valuation discount to LAUR's 17.0x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, STRA's 7.2x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than LAUR's 9.8x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5M | $4.6B | $1.8B | $85M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $148M | $5.3B | $1.8B | $84M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.07x | 17.02x | 14.59x | -3.55x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 15.26x | 11.01x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.94x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 9.77x | 7.22x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.03x | 2.70x | 1.42x | 0.53x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.02x | 4.02x | 1.10x | 0.87x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 17.45x | 11.68x | — |
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. STRA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HYFM's 0.76x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), STRA scores 8/9 vs HYFM's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -32.3% | +25.4% | +7.9% | -22.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -16.3% | +12.9% | +6.2% | -15.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -9.6% | +20.3% | +9.0% | -16.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -12.1% | +26.7% | +10.7% | -18.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.76x | 0.71x | 0.07x | 0.30x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $143M | $701M | -$32M | -$929,000 |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $26M | $147M | $141M | $30M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $170M | $847M | $109M | $29M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.77x | 34.91x | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LAUR leads this category, winning 5 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% | -3.4% | +1.4% | -7.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -75.4% | +40.7% | -7.8% | +25.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.9% | +175.1% | +3.8% | -62.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.8% | +200.4% | +17.8% | -96.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.8% | +216.8% | +114.9% | -75.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -56.8% | +40.1% | +1.3% | -27.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LAUR and STRA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
STRA is the less volatile stock with a 0.48 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. LAUR currently trades 84.9% 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 | 0.59x | 0.48x | 1.27x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.78 | $37.91 | $93.45 | $2.40 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.81 | $21.16 | $69.70 | $0.87 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +21.8% | +84.9% | +84.6% | +59.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.8 | 49.6 | 47.3 | 63.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 41K | 1.9M | 315K | 476K |
Analyst Outlook
STRA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LAUR as "Buy", STRA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 21.2% upside for LAUR (target: $39) vs 10.0% for STRA (target: $87). STRA is the only dividend payer here at 3.19% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | — |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $39.00 | $87.00 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 11 | 18 | — |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.0% | +3.2% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.00 | $2.52 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +4.7% | +7.7% | 0.0% |
LAUR leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). STRA leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
HYFM vs LAUR vs STRA vs GRWG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HYFM or LAUR or STRA or GRWG 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). Strategic Education, Inc. (STRA) offers the better valuation at 14. 6x trailing P/E (11. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Laureate Education, Inc. (LAUR) 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 — HYFM or LAUR or STRA or GRWG?
On trailing P/E, Strategic Education, Inc.
(STRA) is the cheapest at 14. 6x versus Laureate Education, Inc. at 17. 0x. On forward P/E, Strategic Education, Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 0x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HYFM or LAUR or STRA or GRWG?
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: LAUR returned +216. 8% 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 LAUR or STRA or GRWG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Strategic Education, Inc.
(STRA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 48β versus GrowGeneration Corp. 's 1. 27β — meaning GRWG is approximately 163% 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 76% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HYFM or LAUR or STRA or GRWG?
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: GrowGeneration Corp. grew EPS 51. 2% year-over-year, compared to -1. 9% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, 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 LAUR or STRA or GRWG?
Laureate Education, Inc.
(LAUR) is the more profitable company, earning 16. 5% net margin versus -35. 1% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 16. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LAUR leads at 25. 3% versus -27. 4% for HYFM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — STRA leads at 49. 0%, 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 LAUR or STRA or GRWG more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Strategic Education, Inc.
(STRA) trades at 11. 0x forward P/E versus 15. 3x for Laureate Education, Inc. — 4. 3x 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 LAUR or STRA or GRWG?
In this comparison, STRA (3.
2% yield) pays a dividend. HYFM, LAUR, GRWG do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HYFM or LAUR or STRA or GRWG better for a retirement portfolio?
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. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (STRA: +114. 9%, 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 LAUR and STRA and GRWG?
These companies operate in different sectors (HYFM (Industrials) and LAUR (Consumer Defensive) and STRA (Consumer Defensive) and GRWG (Consumer Cyclical)), 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; LAUR is a small-cap deep-value stock; STRA is a small-cap deep-value stock; GRWG is a small-cap quality compounder stock. STRA pays a dividend while HYFM, LAUR, GRWG 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.