B&G Foods vs Simply Good Foods
BGS and SMPL side by side, both in food and kindred products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BGS and SMPL compare
Simply Good Foods is the larger company, worth 3.8 times as much as B&G Foods ($1.1B against $284M).
B&G Foods grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−2.7% versus −6.5% for Simply Good Foods).
B&G Foods keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −4.7% compared with −11.5% at Simply Good Foods.
B&G Foods pays a dividend yielding 16.3%; Simply Good Foods does not pay one.
B&G Foods scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 8 for Simply Good Foods), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | BGS | SMPL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $284M | $1.1B |
| Share price | $3.50 | $12.57 |
| Change, 1 year | −25.1% | −35.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −88.6% | −67.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.49 | 0.45 |
| Employees | 2,497 | 282 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 3 | 3 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | 0.2× (better) | 0.8× |
| P/B | 0.8× | 0.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.9× | – |
| P/FCF | 2.9× (better) | 7.0× |
| FCF yield | 35.0% (better) | 14.4% |
| Fair value | $13.74 | $28.37 |
| Margin of safety | 74.5% (better) | 55.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −2.7% (better) | −6.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −1.5% | 6.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −250% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −266% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 21.8% | 32.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 3.7% (better) | −13.2% |
| Net margin | −4.7% (better) | −11.5% |
| FCF margin | 5.6% | 11.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | −20.4% | −9.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 2.2% (better) | −7.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 5.75 | 0.24 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 15.68 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | −8.4× |
| Current ratio | 2.84 | 5.57 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.14 | 2.00 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 16.3% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −16.7% | – |
| Buyback yield | – | 19.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 16.3% | 19.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 57.3% | 99.0% |
| Held by insiders | 5.3% | 10.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$248K | $1.1M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 18.4% | 12.7% |
Go deeper
- BGS stock overview
- BGS income statement
- BGS valuation and score
- SMPL stock overview
- SMPL income statement
- SMPL valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.