Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. LCII scored 73.4, ALV scored 63.2 — LCII leads.
Compare another set
LCII
LCI Industries
Recreational Vehicles · Quality-Growth
73.4
$78.30 · $1.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
10.2
LCII leads
ALV
Autoliv, Inc.
Auto Parts · Quality-Growth
63.2
$109.76 · $8.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestLCII9.1x
Fastest growthLCII+10.2%
Strongest balance sheetLCII0.80
Highest qualityALV81 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueLCII-55%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
LCII
stronger →← stronger
ALV
67
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
81
71
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
83
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
63
LCII is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
LCII
ALV
$287mC
FCF
$757mC+
+10.2%B
Rev
+5.9%C+
0.80B
D/E
0.88B
9.1xA
P/E
12.9xA-
1.04B+
PEG
0.85B+
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
LCII
ALV
55% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
14% below
~-12%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~2%/yr
+104%
1-yr DCF upside
+10%
+121%
5-yr DCF upside
+16%
+148%
10-yr DCF upside
+24%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
LCII
No notable signals flagged.
ALV
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
The companies
LCIILCI Industries
Recreational Vehicles · $78.30 · beta 1.21
Why now
Recreational Vehicles · market cap $1.9b. Down 51% from 52-week high of $159.66 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +10%, comfortably above the S&P median. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $126.30 (implying +61% upside).
Moat
ROE 15% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 136% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 51% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
ALVAutoliv, Inc.
Auto Parts · $109.76 · beta 1.40
Why now
Auto Parts · market cap $8.0b. 17% off the 52-week high of $132.17. PEG 0.85 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 16 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $134.31 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 118% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
The model favors ALV (65.4) over LCII (63.3) primarily due to ALV's significantly higher Quality pillar score of 81 and its durable high returns. A contrarian could prefer LCII, which trades at a substantial 52% discount to fair value and implies a negative 12% annual growth rate, setting a very low bar for future performance.
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 LCII and ALV diverge
On the headline score the gap is 10.2 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.
GrowthLCII 71.5 · ALV 50.0LCII +21.5
ValueLCII 83.0 · ALV 62.6LCII +20.4
QualityLCII 66.5 · ALV 80.6ALV +14.1
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value 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.
Common questions
Is LCII or ALV the better stock?
LCII scores higher: LCII 73.4, ALV 63.2 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do LCII and ALV differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where LCII leads by 22 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are LCII and ALV scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.