Auto - Recreational Vehicles
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MAMO vs HOG vs PII vs HLLY vs FOXF
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Recreational Vehicles
Auto - Recreational Vehicles
Auto - Parts
Auto - Parts
MAMO vs HOG vs PII vs HLLY vs FOXF — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Recreational Vehicles | Auto - Recreational Vehicles | Auto - Recreational Vehicles | Auto - Parts | Auto - Parts |
| Market Cap | $41M | $2.64B | $3.80B | $302M | $779M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $71M | $4.32B | $7.27B | $608M | $1.48B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-825K | $230M | $-446M | $24M | $-300M |
| Gross Margin | 33.4% | 23.0% | 19.6% | 42.7% | 29.7% |
| Operating Margin | -2.5% | 5.9% | -0.5% | 10.4% | -18.0% |
| Forward P/E | 23.2x | 58.8x | 37.8x | 8.9x | 17.6x |
| Total Debt | $15M | $3.05B | $1.54B | $523M | $780M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10M | $3.09B | $138M | $37M | $58M |
MAMO vs HOG vs PII vs HLLY vs FOXF — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Apr 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Massimo Group Commo… (MAMO) | 100 | 23.5 | -76.5% |
| Harley-Davidson, In… (HOG) | 100 | 73.9 | -26.1% |
| Polaris Inc. (PII) | 100 | 80.1 | -19.9% |
| Holley Inc. (HLLY) | 100 | 70.1 | -29.9% |
| Fox Factory Holding… (FOXF) | 100 | 45.7 | -54.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MAMO vs HOG vs PII vs HLLY vs FOXF
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, MAMO doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
HOG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.96, Low D/E 96.7%, current ratio 2.10x
- Beta 0.96, yield 3.0%, current ratio 2.10x
- 5.3% margin vs FOXF's -20.2%
- Beta 0.96 vs HLLY's 1.94, lower leverage
PII is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 29 yrs, beta 1.56, yield 3.9%
- 4.3% 10Y total return vs HOG's -28.0%
- 3.9% yield, 29-year raise streak, vs HOG's 3.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
- +107.0% vs MAMO's -56.4%
HLLY ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 1.9%, EPS growth 180.0%, 3Y rev CAGR -3.8%
- Lower P/E (8.9x vs 17.6x)
FOXF is the clearest fit if your priority is growth.
- 5.3% revenue growth vs HOG's -13.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.3% revenue growth vs HOG's -13.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.9x vs 17.6x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 5.3% margin vs FOXF's -20.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.96 vs HLLY's 1.94, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.9% yield, 29-year raise streak, vs HOG's 3.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +107.0% vs MAMO's -56.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.4% ROA vs FOXF's -16.5%, ROIC 5.0% vs -24.2% |
MAMO vs HOG vs PII vs HLLY vs FOXF — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
MAMO vs HOG vs PII vs HLLY vs FOXF — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MAMO leads in 1 of 6 categories
PII leads 1 • HOG leads 0 • HLLY leads 0 • FOXF leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — MAMO and HLLY each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PII is the larger business by revenue, generating $7.3B annually — 102.7x MAMO's $71M. HOG is the more profitable business, keeping 5.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FOXF's -20.2%. On growth, PII holds the edge at +8.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $71M | $4.3B | $7.3B | $608M | $1.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | $366M | $178M | $82M | -$196M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$825,493 | $230M | -$446M | $24M | -$300M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $5M | $44M | $161M | $24M | $12M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +33.4% | +23.0% | +19.6% | +42.7% | +29.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.5% | +5.9% | -0.5% | +10.4% | -18.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -1.2% | +5.3% | -6.1% | +3.9% | -20.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.0% | +1.0% | +2.2% | +3.9% | +0.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -33.6% | -11.8% | +8.0% | -3.7% | +3.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +166.1% | -79.4% | +29.1% | +154.2% | +94.2% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — HOG and HLLY each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.5x trailing earnings, HOG trades at a 63% valuation discount to MAMO's 23.2x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, HOG's 5.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than PII's 20.2x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $41M | $2.6B | $3.8B | $302M | $779M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $46M | $2.6B | $5.2B | $787M | $1.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 23.25x | 8.50x | -8.20x | 15.75x | -1.42x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 58.76x | 37.77x | 8.86x | 17.64x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.04x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.89x | 5.29x | 20.20x | 7.10x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.38x | 0.59x | 0.53x | 0.49x | 0.53x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.90x | 0.91x | 4.54x | 0.67x | 1.16x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.59x | 6.37x | 6.81x | 21.07x | 28.89x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MAMO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HOG delivers a 7.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $7 in annual profit, vs $-45 for PII. MAMO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.70x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PII's 1.83x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HOG scores 7/9 vs MAMO's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.8% | +7.0% | -45.2% | +5.3% | -37.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.9% | +2.4% | -8.6% | +2.0% | -16.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +15.1% | +5.0% | -0.8% | +7.1% | -24.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +19.3% | +5.6% | -1.0% | +8.4% | -30.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.70x | 0.97x | 1.83x | 1.16x | 1.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $5M | -$38M | $1.4B | $485M | $722M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10M | $3.1B | $138M | $37M | $58M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $15M | $3.1B | $1.5B | $523M | $780M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 51.18x | 13.87x | -3.26x | 1.30x | -5.17x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — PII and HLLY each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PII five years ago would be worth $5,543 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,158 for FOXF. Over the past 12 months, PII leads with a +107.0% total return vs MAMO's -56.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HLLY at 1.2% vs FOXF's -42.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -74.9% | +15.4% | +1.9% | -39.1% | +6.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -56.4% | +6.0% | +107.0% | +42.4% | -8.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.9% | -27.8% | -29.0% | +3.7% | -80.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.9% | -45.8% | -44.6% | -74.8% | -88.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.9% | -28.0% | +4.3% | -74.2% | +7.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -30.9% | -10.3% | -10.8% | +1.2% | -42.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — HOG and PII each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HOG is the less volatile stock with a 0.96 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HLLY's 1.94 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PII currently trades 89.1% from its 52-week high vs MAMO's 17.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.21x | 0.99x | 1.59x | 1.90x | 1.52x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.59 | $31.25 | $75.25 | $4.48 | $31.18 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.85 | $17.09 | $33.23 | $1.60 | $13.08 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +17.8% | +75.6% | +89.1% | +56.3% | +59.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 44.8 | 57.1 | 62.2 | 37.4 | 57.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.0M | 3.5M | 1.3M | 822K | 658K |
Analyst Outlook
PII leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HOG as "Hold", PII as "Hold", HLLY as "Buy", FOXF as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 118.3% upside for HLLY (target: $6) vs -6.9% for HOG (target: $22). For income investors, PII offers the higher dividend yield at 3.94% vs HOG's 3.02%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $22.00 | $68.75 | $5.50 | $22.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 35 | 27 | 11 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.0% | +3.9% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 5 | 29 | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.71 | $2.64 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +13.4% | +0.1% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
MAMO leads in 1 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency). PII leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 4 tied.
MAMO vs HOG vs PII vs HLLY vs FOXF: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MAMO or HOG or PII or HLLY or FOXF a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Fox Factory Holding Corp.
(FOXF) is the stronger pick with 5. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 8% for Harley-Davidson, Inc. (HOG). Harley-Davidson, Inc. (HOG) offers the better valuation at 8. 5x trailing P/E (58. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Holley Inc. (HLLY) 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 — MAMO or HOG or PII or HLLY or FOXF?
On trailing P/E, Harley-Davidson, Inc.
(HOG) is the cheapest at 8. 5x versus Massimo Group Common Stock at 23. 2x. On forward P/E, Holley Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MAMO or HOG or PII or HLLY or FOXF?
Over the past 5 years, Polaris Inc.
(PII) delivered a total return of -44. 6%, compared to -88. 4% for Fox Factory Holding Corp. (FOXF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PII returned +5. 6% versus HLLY's -71. 1%. 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 — MAMO or HOG or PII or HLLY or FOXF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Harley-Davidson, Inc.
(HOG) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 99β versus Holley Inc. 's 1. 90β — meaning HLLY is approximately 93% more volatile than HOG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Massimo Group Common Stock (MAMO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 70% versus 183% for Polaris Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MAMO or HOG or PII or HLLY or FOXF?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Fox Factory Holding Corp.
(FOXF) is pulling ahead at 5. 3% versus -13. 8% for Harley-Davidson, Inc. (HOG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Holley Inc. grew EPS 180. 0% year-over-year, compared to -82. 5% for Fox Factory Holding Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MAMO leads at 9. 8% 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 — MAMO or HOG or PII or HLLY or FOXF?
Harley-Davidson, Inc.
(HOG) is the more profitable company, earning 7. 6% net margin versus -37. 1% for Fox Factory Holding Corp. — meaning it keeps 7. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HLLY leads at 14. 3% versus -35. 6% for FOXF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HLLY leads at 41. 1%, 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 MAMO or HOG or PII or HLLY or FOXF more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Holley Inc.
(HLLY) trades at 8. 9x forward P/E versus 58. 8x for Harley-Davidson, Inc. — 49. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HLLY: 118. 3% to $5. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — MAMO or HOG or PII or HLLY or FOXF?
In this comparison, PII (3.
9% yield), HOG (3. 0% yield) pay a dividend. MAMO, HLLY, FOXF do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MAMO or HOG or PII or HLLY or FOXF better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Harley-Davidson, Inc.
(HOG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 99), 3. 0% yield). Holley Inc. (HLLY) carries a higher beta of 1. 90 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (HOG: -24. 1%, HLLY: -71. 1%), 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 MAMO and HOG and PII and HLLY and FOXF?
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: MAMO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HOG is a small-cap deep-value stock; PII is a small-cap income-oriented stock; HLLY is a small-cap deep-value stock; FOXF is a small-cap quality compounder stock. HOG, PII pay a dividend while MAMO, HLLY, FOXF 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.