Auto - Recreational Vehicles
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PII vs BC vs HOG vs FOXF vs LCII
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Recreational Vehicles
Auto - Recreational Vehicles
Auto - Parts
Auto - Recreational Vehicles
PII vs BC vs HOG vs FOXF vs LCII — 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 - Recreational Vehicles |
| Market Cap | $3.80B | $5.26B | $2.64B | $779M | $2.83B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7.27B | $5.52B | $4.32B | $1.48B | $4.17B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-446M | $-137M | $230M | $-300M | $202M |
| Gross Margin | 19.6% | 18.0% | 23.0% | 29.7% | 24.1% |
| Operating Margin | -0.5% | 5.2% | 5.9% | -18.0% | 7.0% |
| Forward P/E | 37.3x | 19.0x | 57.5x | 18.4x | 13.4x |
| Total Debt | $1.54B | $2.43B | $3.05B | $780M | $1.24B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $138M | $275M | $3.09B | $58M | $223M |
PII vs BC vs HOG vs FOXF vs LCII — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Polaris Inc. (PII) | 100 | 76.8 | -23.2% |
| Brunswick Corporati… (BC) | 100 | 146.8 | +46.8% |
| Harley-Davidson, In… (HOG) | 100 | 110.7 | +10.7% |
| Fox Factory Holding… (FOXF) | 100 | 25.8 | -74.2% |
| LCI Industries (LCII) | 100 | 117.7 | +17.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PII vs BC vs HOG vs FOXF vs LCII
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PII ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +107.0% vs FOXF's -8.6%
BC lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
HOG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.96, Low D/E 96.7%, current ratio 2.10x
- PEG 0.26 vs LCII's 3.48
- Better valuation composite
- 5.3% margin vs FOXF's -20.2%
Among these 5 stocks, FOXF doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
LCII is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- Dividend streak 9 yrs, beta 0.99, yield 3.9%
- Rev growth 10.2%, EPS growth 35.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -7.5%
- 111.5% 10Y total return vs BC's 96.4%
- Beta 0.99, yield 3.9%, current ratio 2.85x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.2% revenue growth vs HOG's -13.8% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 5.3% margin vs FOXF's -20.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.96 vs BC's 1.69, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.9% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs PII's 3.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +107.0% vs FOXF's -8.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.3% ROA vs FOXF's -16.5%, ROIC 9.1% vs -24.2% |
PII vs BC vs HOG vs FOXF vs LCII — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
PII vs BC vs HOG vs FOXF vs LCII — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LCII leads in 2 of 6 categories
HOG leads 1 • PII leads 0 • BC leads 0 • FOXF leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — BC and FOXF 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 — 4.9x FOXF's $1.5B. HOG is the more profitable business, keeping 5.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FOXF's -20.2%. On growth, BC holds the edge at +12.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $7.3B | $5.5B | $4.3B | $1.5B | $4.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $178M | $511M | $366M | -$196M | $385M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$446M | -$137M | $230M | -$300M | $202M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $161M | $341M | $44M | $12M | $245M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +19.6% | +18.0% | +23.0% | +29.7% | +24.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -0.5% | +5.2% | +5.9% | -18.0% | +7.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -6.1% | -2.5% | +5.3% | -20.2% | +4.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.2% | +6.2% | +1.0% | +0.8% | +5.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.0% | +12.8% | -11.8% | +3.8% | +4.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +29.1% | +6.7% | -79.4% | +94.2% | +30.4% |
Valuation Metrics
HOG leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.5x trailing earnings, HOG trades at a 45% valuation discount to LCII's 15.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), HOG offers better value at 0.04x vs LCII's 4.01x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.8B | $5.3B | $2.6B | $779M | $2.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.2B | $7.4B | $2.6B | $1.5B | $3.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -8.20x | -38.82x | 8.50x | -1.42x | 15.38x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 37.25x | 18.98x | 57.47x | 18.42x | 13.38x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.04x | — | 4.01x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 20.20x | 29.31x | 5.29x | — | 9.57x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.53x | 0.98x | 0.59x | 0.53x | 0.69x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.54x | 3.26x | 0.91x | 1.16x | 2.13x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.81x | 13.27x | 6.37x | 28.89x | 10.16x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LCII leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LCII delivers a 14.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $15 in annual profit, vs $-45 for PII. LCII carries lower financial leverage with a 0.91x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PII's 1.83x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LCII scores 8/9 vs FOXF's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -45.2% | -5.1% | +7.0% | -37.0% | +14.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -8.6% | -2.5% | +2.4% | -16.5% | +6.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.8% | -0.8% | +5.0% | -24.2% | +9.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -1.0% | -1.0% | +5.6% | -30.9% | +10.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.83x | 1.49x | 0.97x | 1.16x | 0.91x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.4B | $2.2B | -$38M | $722M | $1.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $138M | $275M | $3.1B | $58M | $223M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.5B | $2.4B | $3.1B | $780M | $1.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.26x | 4.34x | 13.87x | -5.17x | 5.49x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LCII leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LCII five years ago would be worth $9,386 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,158 for FOXF. Over the past 12 months, PII leads with a +107.0% total return vs FOXF's -8.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LCII at 3.6% vs FOXF's -42.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1.9% | +7.0% | +15.4% | +6.6% | -5.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +107.0% | +79.7% | +6.0% | -8.6% | +45.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -29.0% | +3.8% | -27.8% | -80.6% | +11.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -44.6% | -23.5% | -45.8% | -88.4% | -6.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.3% | +96.4% | -28.0% | +7.0% | +111.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -10.8% | +1.2% | -10.3% | -42.1% | +3.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BC and HOG 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 BC's 1.69 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BC currently trades 89.5% from its 52-week high vs FOXF's 59.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.56x | 1.69x | 0.96x | 1.55x | 0.99x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $75.25 | $90.23 | $31.25 | $31.18 | $159.66 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $33.23 | $45.52 | $17.09 | $13.08 | $82.29 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.1% | +89.5% | +75.6% | +59.6% | +72.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.2 | 57.6 | 57.1 | 57.0 | 45.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.3M | 886K | 3.5M | 658K | 352K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — PII and LCII each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PII as "Hold", BC as "Buy", HOG as "Hold", FOXF as "Buy", LCII as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 29.3% upside for LCII (target: $151) vs -12.0% for HOG (target: $21). For income investors, LCII offers the higher dividend yield at 3.94% vs BC's 2.12%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $68.75 | $88.78 | $20.80 | $21.50 | $150.60 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 27 | 31 | 35 | 18 | 14 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.9% | +2.1% | +3.0% | — | +3.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 29 | 13 | 5 | 1 | 9 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.64 | $1.71 | $0.71 | — | $4.59 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +1.5% | +13.4% | +0.2% | +4.5% |
LCII leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). HOG leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
PII vs BC vs HOG vs FOXF vs LCII: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PII or BC or HOG or FOXF or LCII a better buy right now?
For growth investors, LCI Industries (LCII) is the stronger pick with 10.
2% 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 (57. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Brunswick Corporation (BC) a "Buy" — based on 31 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 — PII or BC or HOG or FOXF or LCII?
On trailing P/E, Harley-Davidson, Inc.
(HOG) is the cheapest at 8. 5x versus LCI Industries at 15. 4x. On forward P/E, LCI Industries is actually cheaper at 13. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Harley-Davidson, Inc. wins at 0. 26x versus LCI Industries's 3. 48x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PII or BC or HOG or FOXF or LCII?
Over the past 5 years, LCI Industries (LCII) delivered a total return of -6.
1%, compared to -88. 4% for Fox Factory Holding Corp. (FOXF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LCII returned +111. 5% versus HOG's -28. 0%. 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 — PII or BC or HOG or FOXF or LCII?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Harley-Davidson, Inc.
(HOG) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 96β versus Brunswick Corporation's 1. 69β — meaning BC is approximately 75% more volatile than HOG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, LCI Industries (LCII) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 91% versus 183% for Polaris Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PII or BC or HOG or FOXF or LCII?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), LCI Industries (LCII) is pulling ahead at 10.
2% versus -13. 8% for Harley-Davidson, Inc. (HOG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LCI Industries grew EPS 35. 2% year-over-year, compared to -82. 5% for Fox Factory Holding Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FOXF leads at -2. 9% 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 — PII or BC or HOG or FOXF or LCII?
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: HOG leads at 8. 6% versus -35. 6% for FOXF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HOG leads at 30. 2%, 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 PII or BC or HOG or FOXF or LCII more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Harley-Davidson, Inc. (HOG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 26x versus LCI Industries's 3. 48x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, LCI Industries (LCII) trades at 13. 4x forward P/E versus 57. 5x for Harley-Davidson, Inc. — 44. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LCII: 29. 3% to $150. 60.
08Which pays a better dividend — PII or BC or HOG or FOXF or LCII?
In this comparison, LCII (3.
9% yield), PII (3. 9% yield), HOG (3. 0% yield), BC (2. 1% yield) pay a dividend. FOXF does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is PII or BC or HOG or FOXF or LCII better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, LCI Industries (LCII) 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. 9% yield, +111. 5% 10Y return). Fox Factory Holding Corp. (FOXF) carries a higher beta of 1. 55 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LCII: +111. 5%, FOXF: +7. 0%), 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 PII and BC and HOG and FOXF and LCII?
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: PII is a small-cap income-oriented stock; BC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HOG is a small-cap deep-value stock; FOXF is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LCII is a small-cap deep-value stock. PII, BC, HOG, LCII pay a dividend while FOXF 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.
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.