COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
GT vs LCII
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GT scored 39.9, LCII scored 63.1 — LCII leads.
Compare another set
GT
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
39.9
$6.15 · $1.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
23.2
LCII leads
LCII
LCI Industries
63.1
$103.36 · $2.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- Fastest growthLCII+4.1%
- Strongest balance sheetLCII0.80
- Highest qualityLCII65 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueGT-57%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
GT
stronger →← stronger
LCII
48
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
65
14
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
54
93
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
71
LCII is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GT
LCII
$192mC
FCF
$287mC
-4.3%D+
Rev
+4.1%C+
2.74C
D/E
0.80B
0.1xA
P/S
—
0.43A
PEG
1.04B+
—
P/E
12.0xA-
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
GT
LCII
57% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
43% below
~-6%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-6%/yr
+77%
1-yr DCF upside
+59%
+132%
5-yr DCF upside
+76%
+244%
10-yr DCF upside
+104%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
GT
Why this score
- Durable high returns
LCII
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
GTThe Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
Why now
Auto Parts · market cap $1.8b. Down 42% from 52-week high of $10.62 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.43 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 7 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $7.46 (implying +21% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
D/E 2.74 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Currently unprofitable (margin -14.4%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 42% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
LCIILCI Industries
Why now
Recreational Vehicles · market cap $2.5b. Down 35% from 52-week high of $159.66 — deep drawdown territory. 10 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $129.40 (implying +25% upside).
Moat
ROE 15% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 136% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 35% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where GT and LCII diverge
On the headline score the gap is 23.2 points in favor of LCII. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- GrowthGT 14.1 · LCII 54.0LCII +39.9
- ValueGT 92.8 · LCII 71.1GT +21.7
- QualityGT 48.4 · LCII 65.4LCII +17.0
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.