Conagra Brands vs Hormel Foods
CAG and HRL 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 CAG and HRL compare
Hormel Foods is the larger company, worth 1.7 times as much as Conagra Brands ($11.7B against $7.0B).
Hormel Foods grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (0.73% versus −1.8% for Conagra Brands).
Hormel Foods keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.8% compared with −17.0% at Conagra Brands.
Both pay dividends: Conagra Brands yields 6.0% and Hormel Foods 5.5%.
Hormel Foods scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 10 for Conagra Brands), 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 | CAG | HRL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.0B | $11.7B |
| Share price | $14.57 | $21.28 |
| Change, 1 year | −16.2% | −0.98% |
| Change, 5 years | −55.3% | −50.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.15 | 0.19 |
| Employees | 17K | 20K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 5 | 5 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 33.8× |
| P/S | 0.6× (better) | 1.0× |
| P/B | – | 1.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 16.2× |
| P/FCF | 7.9× (better) | 15.0× |
| FCF yield | 12.6% (better) | 6.7% |
| Fair value | $30.34 | $18.11 |
| Margin of safety | 52.0% (better) | −17.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −1.8% | 0.73% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 0.17% | 4.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −324% | −54.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −326% | −54.0% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −12.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 23.8% (better) | 15.7% |
| Operating margin | −15.2% | 4.7% (better) |
| Net margin | −17.0% | 2.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 7.8% (better) | 6.4% |
| Return on equity | – | 4.3% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 3.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.36 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.35 |
| Interest coverage | – | 7.3× |
| Current ratio | 1.10 | 1.88 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.04 | 3.28 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 6.0% (better) | 5.5% |
| Payout ratio | – | 187% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 6.2% (better) | 4.5% |
| Buyback yield | 0.64% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 6.6% (better) | 5.5% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 88.9% | 43.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.78% | 0.52% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $896K (better) | −$817K |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.3% | 4.2% |
Go deeper
- CAG stock overview
- CAG income statement
- CAG valuation and score
- HRL stock overview
- HRL income statement
- HRL valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.