Auto - Recreational Vehicles
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
VMAR vs MPAA vs MBUU vs HZO vs BC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Parts
Auto - Recreational Vehicles
Specialty Retail
Auto - Recreational Vehicles
VMAR vs MPAA vs MBUU vs HZO vs BC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Recreational Vehicles | Auto - Parts | Auto - Recreational Vehicles | Specialty Retail | Auto - Recreational Vehicles |
| Market Cap | $3M | $220M | $473M | $724M | $5.26B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $41M | $771M | $826M | $2.24B | $5.52B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-29M | $2M | $-5M | $-64M | $-137M |
| Gross Margin | 8.0% | 19.2% | 15.4% | 32.7% | 18.0% |
| Operating Margin | -30.2% | 6.1% | 0.1% | -0.6% | 5.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 15.3x | 20.9x | 45.0x | 19.0x |
| Total Debt | $47M | $201M | $25M | $1.25B | $2.43B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $7M | $9M | $37M | $170M | $275M |
VMAR vs MPAA vs MBUU vs HZO vs BC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vision Marine Techn… (VMAR) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| Motorcar Parts of A… (MPAA) | 100 | 57.0 | -43.0% |
| Malibu Boats, Inc. (MBUU) | 100 | 44.6 | -55.4% |
| MarineMax, Inc. (HZO) | 100 | 100.1 | +0.1% |
| Brunswick Corporati… (BC) | 100 | 108.2 | +8.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: VMAR vs MPAA vs MBUU vs HZO vs BC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
VMAR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 404.9% revenue growth vs HZO's -5.0%
MPAA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 5.5%, EPS growth 60.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.99, Low D/E 78.1%, current ratio 1.46x
- Beta 0.99, current ratio 1.46x
- Lower P/E (15.3x vs 19.0x)
MBUU lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, HZO doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
BC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 1.69, yield 2.1%
- 96.4% 10Y total return vs HZO's 78.6%
- 2.1% yield; 13-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
- +79.7% vs VMAR's -87.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 404.9% revenue growth vs HZO's -5.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.3x vs 19.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 0.3% margin vs VMAR's -72.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.99 vs HZO's 2.09, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.1% yield; 13-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +79.7% vs VMAR's -87.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 0.2% ROA vs VMAR's -49.3%, ROIC 6.2% vs -42.2% |
VMAR vs MPAA vs MBUU vs HZO vs BC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
VMAR vs MPAA vs MBUU vs HZO vs BC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BC leads in 2 of 6 categories
VMAR leads 0 • MPAA leads 0 • MBUU leads 0 • HZO leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — MPAA and HZO each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BC is the larger business by revenue, generating $5.5B annually — 136.0x VMAR's $41M. MPAA is the more profitable business, keeping 0.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to VMAR's -72.5%. On growth, VMAR holds the edge at +152.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $41M | $771M | $826M | $2.2B | $5.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$10M | $49M | $11M | $11M | $511M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$29M | $2M | -$5M | -$64M | -$137M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$5M | $30M | $40M | $169M | $341M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +8.0% | +19.2% | +15.4% | +32.7% | +18.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -30.2% | +6.1% | +0.1% | -0.6% | +5.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -72.5% | +0.3% | -0.6% | -2.8% | -2.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -12.3% | +3.9% | +4.8% | +7.6% | +6.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +152.3% | -9.9% | +3.1% | -16.5% | +12.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -18.2% | -118.2% | -185.7% | +6.7% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — VMAR and MPAA each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, MBUU's 7.6x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than BC's 29.3x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3M | $220M | $473M | $724M | $5.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $32M | $412M | $461M | $1.8B | $7.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.00x | -11.59x | 33.42x | -22.98x | -38.82x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 15.29x | 20.89x | 44.98x | 18.98x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 8.19x | 7.64x | 11.81x | 29.31x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.22x | 0.29x | 0.59x | 0.31x | 0.98x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.48x | 0.88x | 0.96x | 0.76x | 3.26x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 5.39x | 16.53x | 60.62x | 13.27x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — MPAA and MBUU each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MPAA delivers a 0.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $1 in annual profit, vs $-7 for VMAR. MBUU carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VMAR's 5.51x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MPAA scores 7/9 vs BC's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -6.9% | +0.8% | -1.0% | -6.7% | -5.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -49.3% | +0.2% | -0.7% | -2.6% | -2.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -42.2% | +6.2% | +3.2% | +3.8% | -0.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -124.2% | +6.6% | +3.6% | +6.8% | -1.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 5.51x | 0.78x | 0.05x | 1.31x | 1.49x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $39M | $192M | -$12M | $1.1B | $2.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $7M | $9M | $37M | $170M | $275M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $47M | $201M | $25M | $1.2B | $2.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -10.81x | 0.94x | 1.84x | 0.71x | 4.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BC five years ago would be worth $7,649 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1 for VMAR. Over the past 12 months, BC leads with a +79.7% total return vs VMAR's -87.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MPAA at 34.5% vs VMAR's -94.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +316.7% | -7.2% | -11.2% | +36.5% | +7.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -87.6% | +24.3% | -14.7% | +56.7% | +79.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +143.5% | -56.4% | +14.4% | +3.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -51.7% | -70.0% | -49.9% | -23.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -62.7% | +76.9% | +78.6% | +96.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -94.5% | +34.5% | -24.2% | +4.6% | +1.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MPAA and HZO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MPAA is the less volatile stock with a 0.99 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HZO's 2.09 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HZO currently trades 99.1% from its 52-week high vs VMAR's 9.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.37x | 0.99x | 1.71x | 2.09x | 1.69x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $8.88 | $18.12 | $39.65 | $33.15 | $90.23 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.14 | $9.09 | $23.84 | $20.52 | $45.52 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +9.6% | +63.3% | +64.1% | +99.1% | +89.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 21.9 | 58.0 | 50.0 | 61.2 | 57.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 199K | 87K | 336K | 344K | 886K |
Analyst Outlook
BC leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MPAA as "Buy", MBUU as "Buy", HZO as "Buy", BC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 74.4% upside for MPAA (target: $20) vs -0.6% for HZO (target: $33). BC is the only dividend payer here at 2.12% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $20.00 | $32.75 | $32.67 | $88.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 7 | 16 | 17 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +2.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | 1 | 13 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $1.71 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.2% | +7.6% | +3.8% | +1.5% |
BC leads in 2 of 6 categories — strongest in Total Returns and Analyst Outlook. 4 categories are tied.
VMAR vs MPAA vs MBUU vs HZO vs BC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is VMAR or MPAA or MBUU or HZO or BC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Vision Marine Technologies Inc.
(VMAR) is the stronger pick with 404. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 0% for MarineMax, Inc. (HZO). Malibu Boats, Inc. (MBUU) offers the better valuation at 33. 4x trailing P/E (20. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Motorcar Parts of America, Inc. (MPAA) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — VMAR or MPAA or MBUU or HZO or BC?
On forward P/E, Motorcar Parts of America, Inc.
is actually cheaper at 15. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — VMAR or MPAA or MBUU or HZO or BC?
Over the past 5 years, Brunswick Corporation (BC) delivered a total return of -23.
5%, compared to -100. 0% for Vision Marine Technologies Inc. (VMAR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BC returned +96. 4% versus VMAR'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.
04Which is safer — VMAR or MPAA or MBUU or HZO or BC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Motorcar Parts of America, Inc.
(MPAA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 99β versus MarineMax, Inc. 's 2. 09β — meaning HZO is approximately 112% more volatile than MPAA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Malibu Boats, Inc. (MBUU) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 6% for Vision Marine Technologies Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — VMAR or MPAA or MBUU or HZO or BC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Vision Marine Technologies Inc.
(VMAR) is pulling ahead at 404. 9% versus -5. 0% for MarineMax, Inc. (HZO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Malibu Boats, Inc. grew EPS 127. 7% year-over-year, compared to -46885. 3% for Vision Marine Technologies Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, VMAR leads at 35. 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 — VMAR or MPAA or MBUU or HZO or BC?
Malibu Boats, Inc.
(MBUU) is the more profitable company, earning 1. 8% net margin versus -156. 5% for Vision Marine Technologies Inc. — meaning it keeps 1. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MPAA leads at 5. 3% versus -74. 6% for VMAR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HZO leads at 32. 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.
07Is VMAR or MPAA or MBUU or HZO or BC more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Motorcar Parts of America, Inc.
(MPAA) trades at 15. 3x forward P/E versus 45. 0x for MarineMax, Inc. — 29. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MPAA: 74. 4% to $20. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — VMAR or MPAA or MBUU or HZO or BC?
In this comparison, BC (2.
1% yield) pays a dividend. VMAR, MPAA, MBUU, HZO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is VMAR or MPAA or MBUU or HZO or BC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Motorcar Parts of America, Inc.
(MPAA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 99)). MarineMax, Inc. (HZO) carries a higher beta of 2. 09 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MPAA: -62. 7%, HZO: +78. 6%), 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 VMAR and MPAA and MBUU and HZO and BC?
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: VMAR is a small-cap high-growth stock; MPAA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MBUU is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HZO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BC is a small-cap quality compounder stock. BC pays a dividend while VMAR, MPAA, MBUU, HZO 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.