Auto - Manufacturers
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
VFS vs XPEV vs NIO vs LI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Manufacturers
Auto - Manufacturers
Auto - Manufacturers
VFS vs XPEV vs NIO vs LI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Manufacturers | Auto - Manufacturers | Auto - Manufacturers | Auto - Manufacturers |
| Market Cap | $9.99B | $5.42B | $12.28B | $35.34B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $90.43T | $60.29B | $69.42B | $125.72B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-97.04T | $-4.28B | $-24.31B | $4.51B |
| Gross Margin | -42.5% | 15.7% | 10.3% | 19.4% |
| Operating Margin | -79.2% | -8.9% | -32.6% | 2.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 11.3x |
| Total Debt | $109.86T | $15.94B | $33.82B | $16.34B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10.92T | $18.59B | $19.33B | $65.90B |
VFS vs XPEV vs NIO vs LI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| VinFast Auto Ltd. (VFS) | 100 | 12.3 | -87.7% |
| XPeng Inc. (XPEV) | 100 | 87.4 | -12.6% |
| NIO Inc. (NIO) | 100 | 57.2 | -42.8% |
| Li Auto Inc. (LI) | 100 | 42.3 | -57.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: VFS vs XPEV vs NIO vs LI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
VFS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.70
- Rev growth 105.4%, EPS growth -25.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 86.6%
- 105.4% revenue growth vs LI's 16.7%
- Beta 0.70 vs XPEV's 1.39
XPEV lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
NIO is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +52.9% vs LI's -33.1%
LI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 6.9% 10Y total return vs XPEV's -26.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.94, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 1.82x
- Beta 0.94, current ratio 1.82x
- 3.6% margin vs VFS's -107.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 105.4% revenue growth vs LI's 16.7% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.6% margin vs VFS's -107.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs XPEV's 1.39 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +52.9% vs LI's -33.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.8% ROA vs VFS's -55.1%, ROIC 209.3% vs -188.2% |
VFS vs XPEV vs NIO vs LI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
VFS vs XPEV vs NIO vs LI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LI leads in 2 of 6 categories
XPEV leads 1 • VFS leads 1 • NIO leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LI leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
VFS is the larger business by revenue, generating $90.43T annually — 1499.8x XPEV's $60.3B. LI is the more profitable business, keeping 3.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to VFS's -107.3%. On growth, VFS holds the edge at +138.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $90.43T | $60.3B | $69.4B | $125.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$60.12T | -$3.9B | -$23.0B | $5.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$97.04T | -$4.3B | -$24.3B | $4.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$67.94T | $0 | -$16.5B | -$7.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -42.5% | +15.7% | +10.3% | +19.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -79.2% | -8.9% | -32.6% | +2.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -107.3% | -7.1% | -35.0% | +3.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -75.1% | -10.9% | -23.8% | -6.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +138.9% | +125.3% | +9.0% | -36.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -14.8% | +63.2% | +7.6% | -123.3% |
Valuation Metrics
XPEV leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $10.0B | $5.4B | $12.3B | $35.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $13.7B | $5.0B | $14.4B | $28.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.71x | -17.29x | -3.62x | 15.89x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 11.29x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 20.27x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.91x | 0.90x | 1.27x | 1.66x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 3.20x | 6.08x | 1.79x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 29.32x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LI leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LI delivers a 6.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-3 for NIO. LI carries lower financial leverage with a 0.23x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NIO's 2.50x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), VFS scores 5/9 vs NIO's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -13.8% | -2.7% | +6.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -55.1% | -5.0% | -23.7% | +2.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -188.2% | -16.9% | -55.2% | +2.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -70.9% | -14.7% | -41.7% | +7.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.51x | 2.50x | 0.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $98.94T | -$2.6B | $14.5B | -$49.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10.92T | $18.6B | $19.3B | $65.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $109.86T | $15.9B | $33.8B | $16.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.34x | -10.29x | -25.29x | 28.54x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — XPEV and LI each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LI five years ago would be worth $9,639 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,589 for NIO. Over the past 12 months, NIO leads with a +52.9% total return vs LI's -33.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors XPEV at 13.8% vs VFS's -25.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +26.3% | -23.9% | +14.2% | +2.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +14.8% | -18.9% | +52.9% | -33.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.1% | +47.4% | -29.0% | -28.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.1% | -41.7% | -84.1% | -3.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.1% | -26.7% | -11.1% | +6.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -25.8% | +13.8% | -10.8% | -10.7% |
Risk & Volatility
VFS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
VFS is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than XPEV's 1.39 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. VFS currently trades 80.8% from its 52-week high vs LI's 54.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.70x | 1.39x | 1.29x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.29 | $28.24 | $8.02 | $32.03 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.78 | $15.38 | $3.34 | $15.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +80.8% | +55.1% | +73.2% | +54.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.6 | 40.2 | 44.3 | 44.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 814K | 6.4M | 39.7M | 3.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: VFS as "Buy", XPEV as "Buy", NIO as "Buy", LI as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 64.0% upside for XPEV (target: $26) vs 9.9% for NIO (target: $6).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $6.50 | $25.50 | $6.45 | $20.01 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 17 | 24 | 16 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
LI leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). XPEV leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
VFS vs XPEV vs NIO vs LI: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is VFS or XPEV or NIO or LI a better buy right now?
For growth investors, VinFast Auto Ltd.
(VFS) is the stronger pick with 105. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 16. 7% for Li Auto Inc. (LI). Li Auto Inc. (LI) offers the better valuation at 15. 9x trailing P/E (11. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate VinFast Auto Ltd. (VFS) 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 is the better long-term investment — VFS or XPEV or NIO or LI?
Over the past 5 years, Li Auto Inc.
(LI) delivered a total return of -3. 6%, compared to -84. 1% for NIO Inc. (NIO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LI returned +6. 9% versus VFS's -59. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — VFS or XPEV or NIO or LI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), VinFast Auto Ltd.
(VFS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 70β versus XPeng Inc. 's 1. 39β — meaning XPEV is approximately 99% more volatile than VFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Li Auto Inc. (LI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 3% for NIO Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — VFS or XPEV or NIO or LI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), VinFast Auto Ltd.
(VFS) is pulling ahead at 105. 4% versus 16. 7% for Li Auto Inc. (LI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: XPeng Inc. grew EPS 48. 7% year-over-year, compared to -31. 8% for Li Auto Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, VFS leads at 86. 6% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — VFS or XPEV or NIO or LI?
Li Auto Inc.
(LI) is the more profitable company, earning 5. 6% net margin versus -107. 3% for VinFast Auto Ltd. — meaning it keeps 5. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LI leads at 4. 4% versus -79. 2% for VFS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LI leads at 20. 5%, 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.
06Is VFS or XPEV or NIO or LI more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for XPEV: 64.
0% to $25. 50.
07Which pays a better dividend — VFS or XPEV or NIO or LI?
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.
08Is VFS or XPEV or NIO or LI better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, VinFast Auto Ltd.
(VFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 70)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (VFS: -59. 1%, XPEV: -26. 7%), 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.
09What are the main differences between VFS and XPEV and NIO and LI?
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.
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.