LQDT vs AMZN

For growth investors, Liquidity Services, Inc.

(LQDT) is the stronger pick with 31. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 12. 4% for Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN). Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) offers the better valuation at 38. 3x trailing P/E (35. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Liquidity Services, Inc. (LQDT) a "Buy" — based on 14 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.

On trailing P/E, Amazon.

com, Inc. (AMZN) is the cheapest at 38. 3x versus Liquidity Services, Inc. at 42. 8x. On forward P/E, Liquidity Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 25. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Amazon.

com, Inc. (AMZN) delivered a total return of +66. 3%, compared to +44. 1% for Liquidity Services, Inc. (LQDT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AMZN returned +715. 9% versus LQDT's +515. 2%. 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), Liquidity Services, Inc.

(LQDT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 76β versus Amazon. com, Inc. 's 1. 51β — meaning AMZN is approximately 99% more volatile than LQDT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Liquidity Services, Inc. (LQDT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 37% for Amazon. com, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Liquidity Services, Inc.

(LQDT) is pulling ahead at 31. 2% versus 12. 4% for Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Liquidity Services, Inc. grew EPS 38. 1% year-over-year, compared to 29. 7% for Amazon. com, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LQDT leads at 19. 4% 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.

Amazon.

com, Inc. (AMZN) is the more profitable company, earning 10. 8% net margin versus 5. 9% for Liquidity Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 10. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AMZN leads at 11. 2% versus 7. 4% for LQDT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AMZN leads at 50. 3%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, Liquidity Services, Inc.

(LQDT) trades at 25. 0x forward P/E versus 35. 3x for Amazon. com, Inc. — 10. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LQDT: 18. 2% to $44. 00.

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.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Liquidity Services, Inc.

(LQDT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 76), +515. 2% 10Y return). Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) carries a higher beta of 1. 51 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LQDT: +515. 2%, AMZN: +715. 9%), 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.

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: LQDT is a small-cap high-growth stock; AMZN 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.