Auto - Manufacturers
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LI vs NIO vs XPEV vs ZK vs TSLA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Manufacturers
Auto - Manufacturers
Auto - Manufacturers
Auto - Manufacturers
LI vs NIO vs XPEV vs ZK vs TSLA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Manufacturers | Auto - Manufacturers | Auto - Manufacturers | Auto - Manufacturers | Auto - Manufacturers |
| Market Cap | $35.34B | $12.28B | $5.42B | $6.85B | $1.55T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $125.72B | $69.42B | $60.29B | $90.59B | $97.88B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $4.51B | $-24.31B | $-4.28B | $-3.33B | $3.88B |
| Gross Margin | 19.4% | 10.3% | 15.7% | 18.9% | 19.1% |
| Operating Margin | 2.3% | -32.6% | -8.9% | -4.0% | 5.0% |
| Forward P/E | 11.3x | — | — | 2.3x | 213.0x |
| Total Debt | $16.34B | $33.82B | $15.94B | $15.60B | $8.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $65.90B | $19.33B | $18.59B | $7.78B | $16.51B |
LI vs NIO vs XPEV vs ZK vs TSLA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Li Auto Inc. (LI) | 100 | 86.9 | -13.1% |
| NIO Inc. (NIO) | 100 | 108.9 | +8.9% |
| XPeng Inc. (XPEV) | 100 | 187.1 | +87.1% |
| ZEEKR Intelligent T… (ZK) | 100 | 106.0 | +6.0% |
| Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) | 100 | 231.3 | +131.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LI vs NIO vs XPEV vs ZK vs TSLA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LI is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.94, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 1.82x
- Beta 0.94, current ratio 1.82x
NIO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +52.9% vs LI's -33.1%
Among these 5 stocks, XPEV doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ZK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.47
- Rev growth 46.9%, EPS growth 34.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 126.6%
- 46.9% revenue growth vs TSLA's -2.9%
- Lower P/E (2.3x vs 213.0x)
TSLA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 28.6% 10Y total return vs LI's 6.9%
- 4.0% margin vs NIO's -35.0%
- 2.9% ROA vs NIO's -23.7%, ROIC 4.5% vs -55.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 46.9% revenue growth vs TSLA's -2.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (2.3x vs 213.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 4.0% margin vs NIO's -35.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.47 vs TSLA's 2.06 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +52.9% vs LI's -33.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.9% ROA vs NIO's -23.7%, ROIC 4.5% vs -55.2% |
LI vs NIO vs XPEV vs ZK vs TSLA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
LI vs NIO vs XPEV vs ZK vs TSLA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TSLA leads in 2 of 6 categories
ZK leads 2 • LI leads 1 • NIO leads 0 • XPEV leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TSLA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LI is the larger business by revenue, generating $125.7B annually — 2.1x XPEV's $60.3B. TSLA is the more profitable business, keeping 4.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NIO's -35.0%. On growth, XPEV holds the edge at +125.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $125.7B | $69.4B | $60.3B | $90.6B | $97.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $5.4B | -$23.0B | -$3.9B | -$2.7B | $9.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $4.5B | -$24.3B | -$4.3B | -$3.3B | $3.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$7.7B | -$16.5B | $0 | $0 | $7.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +19.4% | +10.3% | +15.7% | +18.9% | +19.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +2.3% | -32.6% | -8.9% | -4.0% | +5.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.6% | -35.0% | -7.1% | -3.7% | +4.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.1% | -23.8% | -10.9% | +2.0% | +7.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -36.5% | +9.0% | +125.3% | +36.4% | +15.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -123.3% | +7.6% | +63.2% | +83.8% | +11.9% |
Valuation Metrics
ZK leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.9x trailing earnings, LI trades at a 96% valuation discount to TSLA's 381.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LI's 20.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than TSLA's 146.4x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $35.3B | $12.3B | $5.4B | $6.8B | $1.55T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $28.1B | $14.4B | $5.0B | $14.7B | $1.54T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.89x | -3.62x | -17.29x | -0.98x | 381.31x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.29x | — | — | 2.29x | 212.96x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 9.84x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 20.27x | — | — | — | 146.35x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.66x | 1.27x | 0.90x | 0.09x | 16.30x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.79x | 6.08x | 3.20x | — | 17.53x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 29.32x | — | — | 4.61x | 248.44x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LI leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LI delivers a 6.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-3 for NIO. TSLA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.10x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NIO's 2.50x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TSLA scores 6/9 vs NIO's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.2% | -2.7% | -13.8% | — | +4.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.8% | -23.7% | -5.0% | -5.4% | +2.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.1% | -55.2% | -16.9% | — | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.8% | -41.7% | -14.7% | — | +4.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.23x | 2.50x | 0.51x | — | 0.10x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$49.6B | $14.5B | -$2.6B | $7.8B | -$8.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $65.9B | $19.3B | $18.6B | $7.8B | $16.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $16.3B | $33.8B | $15.9B | $15.6B | $8.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 28.54x | -25.29x | -10.29x | -14.40x | 17.04x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TSLA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TSLA five years ago would be worth $18,375 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,589 for NIO. Over the past 12 months, NIO leads with a +52.9% total return vs LI's -33.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TSLA at 33.8% vs NIO's -10.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.0% | +14.2% | -23.9% | — | -6.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -33.1% | +52.9% | -18.9% | +6.1% | +49.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -28.9% | -29.0% | +47.4% | -5.4% | +139.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -3.6% | -84.1% | -41.7% | -5.4% | +83.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.9% | -11.1% | -26.7% | -5.4% | +2856.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -10.7% | -10.8% | +13.8% | -1.8% | +33.8% |
Risk & Volatility
ZK leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ZK is the less volatile stock with a 0.47 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TSLA's 2.06 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ZK currently trades 84.3% from its 52-week high vs LI's 54.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.94x | 1.29x | 1.39x | 0.47x | 2.06x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $32.03 | $8.02 | $28.24 | $31.71 | $498.83 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.71 | $3.34 | $15.38 | $24.58 | $271.00 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +54.9% | +73.2% | +55.1% | +84.3% | +82.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 44.6 | 44.3 | 40.2 | 40.0 | 59.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.0M | 39.7M | 6.4M | 0 | 61.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LI as "Buy", NIO as "Buy", XPEV as "Buy", ZK as "Buy", TSLA as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 64.0% upside for XPEV (target: $26) vs 9.4% for TSLA (target: $450).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $20.01 | $6.45 | $25.50 | $33.25 | $450.45 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 16 | 24 | 17 | 2 | 81 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +2.7% | 0.0% |
TSLA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). ZK leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility).
LI vs NIO vs XPEV vs ZK vs TSLA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LI or NIO or XPEV or ZK or TSLA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) is the stronger pick with 46.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 9% for Tesla, Inc. (TSLA). Li Auto Inc. (LI) offers the better valuation at 15. 9x trailing P/E (11. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Li Auto Inc. (LI) a "Buy" — based on 16 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 — LI or NIO or XPEV or ZK or TSLA?
On trailing P/E, Li Auto Inc.
(LI) is the cheapest at 15. 9x versus Tesla, Inc. at 381. 3x. On forward P/E, ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited is actually cheaper at 2. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LI or NIO or XPEV or ZK or TSLA?
Over the past 5 years, Tesla, Inc.
(TSLA) delivered a total return of +83. 7%, compared to -84. 1% for NIO Inc. (NIO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TSLA returned +28. 6% versus XPEV's -26. 7%. 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 — LI or NIO or XPEV or ZK or TSLA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
47β versus Tesla, Inc. 's 2. 06β — meaning TSLA is approximately 341% more volatile than ZK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 3% for NIO Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LI or NIO or XPEV or ZK or TSLA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) is pulling ahead at 46.
9% versus -2. 9% for Tesla, Inc. (TSLA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: XPeng Inc. grew EPS 48. 7% year-over-year, compared to -47. 0% for Tesla, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ZK leads at 126. 6% 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 — LI or NIO or XPEV or ZK or TSLA?
Li Auto Inc.
(LI) is the more profitable company, earning 5. 6% net margin versus -34. 5% for NIO Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TSLA leads at 4. 6% versus -33. 3% for NIO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LI leads at 20. 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 LI or NIO or XPEV or ZK or TSLA more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) trades at 2.
3x forward P/E versus 213. 0x for Tesla, Inc. — 210. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for XPEV: 64. 0% to $25. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — LI or NIO or XPEV or ZK or TSLA?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is LI or NIO or XPEV or ZK or TSLA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
47)). Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) carries a higher beta of 2. 06 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ZK: -5. 4%, TSLA: +28. 6%), 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 LI and NIO and XPEV and ZK and TSLA?
Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: LI is a mid-cap high-growth stock; NIO is a mid-cap high-growth stock; XPEV is a small-cap high-growth stock; ZK is a small-cap high-growth stock; TSLA is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. 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.