TRUG vs GOLF

For growth investors, Acushnet Holdings Corp.

(GOLF) is the stronger pick with 4. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 6% for TruGolf Holdings, Inc. (TRUG). Acushnet Holdings Corp. (GOLF) offers the better valuation at 28. 9x trailing P/E (24. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Acushnet Holdings Corp. (GOLF) a "Hold" — based on 21 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, Acushnet Holdings Corp.

(GOLF) delivered a total return of +81. 1%, compared to -100. 0% for TruGolf Holdings, Inc. (TRUG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GOLF returned +434. 4% versus TRUG's -100. 0%. 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), TruGolf Holdings, Inc.

(TRUG) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 20β versus Acushnet Holdings Corp. 's 1. 17β — meaning GOLF is approximately 477% more volatile than TRUG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Acushnet Holdings Corp. (GOLF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 137% versus 137% for TruGolf Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Acushnet Holdings Corp.

(GOLF) is pulling ahead at 4. 1% versus -13. 6% for TruGolf Holdings, Inc. (TRUG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Acushnet Holdings Corp. grew EPS -8. 0% year-over-year, compared to -100. 7% for TruGolf Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GOLF leads at 4. 1% 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.

Acushnet Holdings Corp.

(GOLF) is the more profitable company, earning 7. 4% net margin versus -80. 7% for TruGolf Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 7. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GOLF leads at 11. 5% versus -32. 3% for TRUG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GOLF leads at 47. 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.

In this comparison, GOLF (1.

0% yield) pays a dividend. TRUG does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, TruGolf Holdings, Inc.

(TRUG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 20)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TRUG: -100. 0%, GOLF: +434. 4%), 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 (TRUG (Technology) and GOLF (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

GOLF pays a dividend while TRUG 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.