HYFM vs SMG

For growth investors, The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) is the stronger pick with -3.

9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -16. 0% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. (HYFM). The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) offers the better valuation at 25. 4x trailing P/E (14. 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.

Over the past 5 years, The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) delivered a total return of -68.

4%, compared to -99. 8% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. (HYFM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SMG returned +34. 9% 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.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc.

(HYFM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 91β versus The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company's 1. 10β — meaning SMG is approximately 20% more volatile than HYFM relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) is pulling ahead at -3.

9% 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 -1. 9% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SMG leads at -4. 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.

The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) is the more profitable company, earning 4.

3% net margin versus -35. 1% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 4. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SMG leads at 10. 5% versus -27. 4% for HYFM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SMG leads at 30. 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.

In this comparison, SMG (4.

2% yield) pays a dividend. HYFM does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (SMG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.

10), 4. 2% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SMG: +34. 9%, HYFM: -99. 8%), 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 (HYFM (Industrials) and SMG (Basic Materials)), 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; SMG is a small-cap income-oriented stock. SMG pays a dividend while HYFM 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.