CF Industries vs Scotts Miracle-Gro
CF and SMG side by side, both in chemicals and allied products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CF and SMG compare
CF Industries is the larger company, worth 5.1 times as much as Scotts Miracle-Gro ($18.7B against $3.6B).
On earnings, CF Industries is cheaper: it trades at 9.1× trailing earnings, against 51.4× for Scotts Miracle-Gro.
CF Industries grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (20.0% versus 4.6% for Scotts Miracle-Gro).
Both pay dividends: CF Industries yields 1.7% and Scotts Miracle-Gro 4.2%.
CF Industries scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 12 for Scotts Miracle-Gro), 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 | CF | SMG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $18.7B | $3.6B |
| Share price | $123.30 | $62.24 |
| Change, 1 year | 46.5% | 15.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 108% | −62.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.14 | 1.33 |
| Employees | 2,900 | 5,200 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 9.1× (better) | 51.4× |
| P/S | 2.4× | 1.0× (better) |
| P/B | 3.2× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 6.0× (better) | 14.9× |
| P/FCF | 9.8× (better) | 13.8× |
| FCF yield | 10.2% (better) | 7.3% |
| Fair value | $221.20 | $48.43 |
| Margin of safety | 44.3% (better) | −28.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 20.0% (better) | 4.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.4% (better) | −3.7% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 76.1% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 43.6% (better) | −18.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 42.5% (better) | 31.8% |
| Operating margin | 41.1% (better) | 11.0% |
| Net margin | – | 2.1% |
| FCF margin | 24.7% (better) | 7.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 35.2% (better) | 12.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.56 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.63 (better) | 5.45 |
| Interest coverage | 18.6× (better) | 3.4× |
| Current ratio | 4.86 (better) | 1.21 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.70 (better) | 2.41 |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.7% | 4.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 209% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 10.8% (better) | −18.5% |
| Buyback yield | 5.1% (better) | 0.33% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.8% (better) | 4.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 105% | 86.5% |
| Held by insiders | 0.59% | 53.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$72.2M | −$5.4M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.6% | 19.6% |
Go deeper
- CF stock overview
- CF income statement
- CF valuation and score
- SMG stock overview
- SMG income statement
- SMG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.