Agricultural - Machinery
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
UGRO vs GRWG vs HYFM vs LAUR vs IIPR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Agricultural - Machinery
Education & Training Services
REIT - Industrial
UGRO vs GRWG vs HYFM vs LAUR vs IIPR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Agricultural - Machinery | Specialty Retail | Agricultural - Machinery | Education & Training Services | REIT - Industrial |
| Market Cap | $3M | $85M | $5M | $4.59B | $1.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $17M | $162M | $146M | $1.74B | $263M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-22M | $-24M | $-65M | $280M | $120M |
| Gross Margin | -1.0% | 26.8% | 10.2% | 26.9% | 60.3% |
| Operating Margin | -77.1% | -15.7% | -35.8% | 24.0% | 46.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 15.3x | 13.2x |
| Total Debt | $8M | $29M | $170M | $847M | $394M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $11M | $30M | $26M | $147M | $48M |
UGRO vs GRWG vs HYFM vs LAUR vs IIPR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| urban-gro, Inc. (UGRO) | 100 | 22.5 | -77.5% |
| GrowGeneration Corp. (GRWG) | 100 | 3.5 | -96.5% |
| Hydrofarm Holdings … (HYFM) | 100 | 0.2 | -99.8% |
| Laureate Education,… (LAUR) | 100 | 220.9 | +120.9% |
| Innovative Industri… (IIPR) | 100 | 30.9 | -69.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: UGRO vs GRWG vs HYFM vs LAUR vs IIPR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
UGRO plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
GRWG lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, HYFM doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
LAUR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 8.6%, EPS growth -1.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.59, Low D/E 71.2%, current ratio 0.60x
- Beta 0.59, yield 0.0%, current ratio 0.60x
- 8.6% revenue growth vs UGRO's -56.5%
IIPR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 9 yrs, beta 0.92, yield 13.5%
- 436.4% 10Y total return vs LAUR's 216.8%
- Lower P/E (13.2x vs 15.3x)
- 45.6% margin vs UGRO's -127.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.6% revenue growth vs UGRO's -56.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.2x vs 15.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 45.6% margin vs UGRO's -127.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.59 vs UGRO's 1.44 | |
| Dividends | 13.5% yield; 9-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +40.7% vs HYFM's -75.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.9% ROA vs UGRO's -24.5% |
UGRO vs GRWG vs HYFM vs LAUR vs IIPR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
UGRO vs GRWG vs HYFM vs LAUR vs IIPR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IIPR leads in 2 of 6 categories
LAUR leads 2 • HYFM leads 1 • UGRO leads 0 • GRWG leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IIPR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LAUR is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.7B annually — 99.9x UGRO's $17M. IIPR is the more profitable business, keeping 45.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UGRO's -127.0%. On growth, UGRO holds the edge at +32.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $17M | $162M | $146M | $1.7B | $263M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$13M | -$14M | -$23M | $535M | $197M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$22M | -$24M | -$65M | $280M | $120M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $542,573 | -$10M | -$8M | $264M | $144M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -1.0% | +26.8% | +10.2% | +26.9% | +60.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -77.1% | -15.7% | -35.8% | +24.0% | +46.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -127.0% | -14.9% | -44.5% | +16.1% | +45.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +3.1% | -6.2% | -5.7% | +15.2% | +54.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +32.8% | +1.0% | -33.3% | +15.4% | -3.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +72.5% | +69.2% | -22.7% | -15.4% | -1.0% |
Valuation Metrics
HYFM leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.4x trailing earnings, IIPR trades at a 15% valuation discount to LAUR's 17.0x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LAUR's 9.8x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than IIPR's 9.9x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3M | $85M | $5M | $4.6B | $1.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $668,152 | $84M | $148M | $5.3B | $2.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.13x | -3.55x | -0.07x | 17.02x | 14.40x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 15.26x | 13.17x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 3.85x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 9.77x | 9.91x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.17x | 0.53x | 0.03x | 2.70x | 6.08x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 0.87x | 0.02x | 4.02x | 0.87x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 5.47x | — | — | 17.45x | 9.26x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LAUR leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LAUR delivers a 25.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $25 in annual profit, vs $-32 for HYFM. IIPR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HYFM's 0.76x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GRWG scores 6/9 vs HYFM's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -22.9% | -32.3% | +25.4% | +6.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -24.5% | -15.2% | -16.3% | +12.9% | +5.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -16.9% | -9.6% | +20.3% | +4.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | -18.8% | -12.1% | +26.7% | +5.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.30x | 0.76x | 0.71x | 0.21x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2M | -$929,000 | $143M | $701M | $346M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $11M | $30M | $26M | $147M | $48M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8M | $29M | $170M | $847M | $394M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -6.57x | — | -3.77x | 34.91x | 6.67x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LAUR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LAUR five years ago would be worth $30,043 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $16 for HYFM. Over the past 12 months, LAUR leads with a +40.7% total return vs HYFM's -75.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LAUR at 40.1% vs HYFM's -56.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -20.8% | -7.8% | -35.0% | -3.4% | +18.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -48.0% | +25.7% | -75.4% | +40.7% | +20.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.2% | -62.0% | -91.9% | +175.1% | +14.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.2% | -96.7% | -99.8% | +200.4% | -50.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.2% | -75.7% | -99.8% | +216.8% | +436.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -49.6% | -27.6% | -56.8% | +40.1% | +4.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LAUR and IIPR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LAUR is the less volatile stock with a 0.59 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than UGRO's 1.44 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IIPR currently trades 92.2% from its 52-week high vs UGRO's 15.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.44x | 1.27x | 0.91x | 0.59x | 0.92x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $36.93 | $2.40 | $4.78 | $37.91 | $61.40 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.17 | $0.87 | $0.81 | $21.16 | $44.58 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +15.2% | +59.2% | +21.8% | +84.9% | +92.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.7 | 63.2 | 54.8 | 49.6 | 59.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.7M | 476K | 41K | 1.9M | 303K |
Analyst Outlook
IIPR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: UGRO as "Buy", LAUR as "Buy", IIPR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 1345.7% upside for UGRO (target: $81) vs -22.3% for IIPR (target: $44). IIPR is the only dividend payer here at 13.46% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | — | — | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $81.25 | — | — | $39.00 | $44.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | — | — | 11 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.0% | +13.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | 0 | 9 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $0.00 | $7.62 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.7% | +1.2% |
IIPR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). LAUR leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
UGRO vs GRWG vs HYFM vs LAUR vs IIPR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is UGRO or GRWG or HYFM or LAUR or IIPR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Laureate Education, Inc.
(LAUR) is the stronger pick with 8. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -56. 5% for urban-gro, Inc. (UGRO). Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR) offers the better valuation at 14. 4x trailing P/E (13. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate urban-gro, Inc. (UGRO) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — UGRO or GRWG or HYFM or LAUR or IIPR?
On trailing P/E, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.
(IIPR) is the cheapest at 14. 4x versus Laureate Education, Inc. at 17. 0x. On forward P/E, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. is actually cheaper at 13. 2x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — UGRO or GRWG or HYFM or LAUR or IIPR?
Over the past 5 years, Laureate Education, Inc.
(LAUR) delivered a total return of +200. 4%, compared to -99. 8% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. (HYFM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IIPR returned +436. 4% versus HYFM's -99. 8%. 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 — UGRO or GRWG or HYFM or LAUR or IIPR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Laureate Education, Inc.
(LAUR) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 59β versus urban-gro, Inc. 's 1. 44β — meaning UGRO is approximately 143% more volatile than LAUR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 21% versus 76% for Hydrofarm Holdings Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — UGRO or GRWG or HYFM or LAUR or IIPR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Laureate Education, Inc.
(LAUR) is pulling ahead at 8. 6% versus -56. 5% for urban-gro, Inc. (UGRO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: GrowGeneration Corp. grew EPS 51. 2% year-over-year, compared to -28. 8% for Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LAUR leads at 11. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — UGRO or GRWG or HYFM or LAUR or IIPR?
Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.
(IIPR) is the more profitable company, earning 43. 0% net margin versus -129. 4% for urban-gro, Inc. — meaning it keeps 43. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IIPR leads at 46. 7% versus -77. 1% for UGRO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — IIPR leads at 88. 7%, 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 UGRO or GRWG or HYFM or LAUR or IIPR more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.
(IIPR) trades at 13. 2x forward P/E versus 15. 3x for Laureate Education, Inc. — 2. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UGRO: 1345. 7% to $81. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — UGRO or GRWG or HYFM or LAUR or IIPR?
In this comparison, IIPR (13.
5% yield) pays a dividend. UGRO, GRWG, HYFM, LAUR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is UGRO or GRWG or HYFM or LAUR or IIPR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc.
(IIPR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 92), 13. 5% yield, +436. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (IIPR: +436. 4%, UGRO: -91. 2%), 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 UGRO and GRWG and HYFM and LAUR and IIPR?
These companies operate in different sectors (UGRO (Industrials) and GRWG (Consumer Cyclical) and HYFM (Industrials) and LAUR (Consumer Defensive) and IIPR (Real Estate)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: UGRO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GRWG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HYFM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LAUR is a small-cap deep-value stock; IIPR is a small-cap deep-value stock. IIPR pays a dividend while UGRO, GRWG, HYFM, LAUR 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.