Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. LCII scored 73.4, RACE scored 40.3 — LCII leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. LCII's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but RACE's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
LCII
LCI Industries
Recreational Vehicles · Quality-Growth
73.4
$78.30 · $1.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
33.1
LCII leads
RACE
Ferrari N.V.
Auto Manufacturers · Quality-Growth
40.3
$389.91 · $68.4B
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 qualityRACE88 / 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
RACE
67
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
88
71
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
83
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
17
LCII is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
LCII
RACE
$287mC
FCF
$1.6bC+
+10.2%B
Rev
+7.0%B
0.80B
D/E
0.86B
9.1xA
P/E
36.2xC
1.04B+
PEG
3.37D
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
RACE
55% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
64% above
~-12%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~20%/yr
+104%
1-yr DCF upside
-46%
+121%
5-yr DCF upside
-39%
+148%
10-yr DCF upside
-28%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
LCII
No notable signals flagged.
RACE
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
Foreign reporter (EUR)
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.
RACEFerrari N.V.
Auto Manufacturers · $389.91 · beta 0.61
Why now
Auto Manufacturers · market cap $68.4b. 11% off the 52-week high of $437.15. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $453.59 (implying +16% upside).
Moat
Net margin 22% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 41% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $68.4b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Trailing P/E 36x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
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 LCII and RACE diverge
On the headline score the gap is 33.1 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.
ValueLCII 83.0 · RACE 17.3LCII +65.7
QualityLCII 66.5 · RACE 88.2RACE +21.7
GrowthLCII 71.5 · RACE 50.0LCII +21.5
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 RACE the better stock?
LCII scores higher: LCII 73.4, RACE 40.3 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 RACE differ most?
The widest gap is value, where LCII leads by 66 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 RACE 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.