Church & Dwight vs Clorox
CHD and CLX side by side, both in soap, detergents, and cleaning preparations; perfumes, cosmetics, and other toilet preparations. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CHD and CLX compare
Church & Dwight is the larger company, worth 2.4 times as much as Clorox ($25.4B against $10.6B).
On earnings, Clorox is cheaper: it trades at 18.3× trailing earnings, against 33.0× for Church & Dwight.
Church & Dwight grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.7% versus −5.4% for Clorox).
Church & Dwight keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.4% compared with 8.7% at Clorox.
Both pay dividends: Church & Dwight yields 1.1% and Clorox 4.2%.
Church & Dwight scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 14 for Clorox), 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 | CHD | CLX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $25.4B | $10.6B |
| Share price | $107.23 | $88.00 |
| Change, 1 year | 31.0% | −20.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 20.8% | −46.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.31 | 0.53 |
| Employees | 5,550 | 9,200 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 14 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 33.0× | 18.3× (better) |
| P/S | 4.1× | 1.6× (better) |
| P/B | 5.7× (better) | 118× |
| EV/EBITDA | 24.2× | 13.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 24.0× (better) | 26.3× |
| PEG | 1.53 | 0.31 (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.2% (better) | 3.8% |
| Fair value | $85.55 | $143.34 |
| Margin of safety | −25.3% | 38.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.7% (better) | −5.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.8% (better) | −1.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −0.98% (better) | −27.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 2.2% (better) | −26.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −0.65% (better) | −2.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 46.1% (better) | 42.3% |
| Operating margin | 18.0% | – |
| Net margin | 12.4% (better) | 8.7% |
| FCF margin | 16.9% (better) | 6.0% |
| Return on equity | 17.8% | 286% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 14.3% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.49 (better) | 56.31 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.56 (better) | 4.22 |
| Interest coverage | 11.6× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.96 (better) | 0.66 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.28 (better) | 1.63 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.1% | 4.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 37.5% | 103% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | 17 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.2% (better) | 2.2% |
| Buyback yield | – | 2.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.1% | 6.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.3% | 86.3% |
| Held by insiders | 0.12% | 0.65% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$12.1M | $846K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.1% | 9.6% |
Go deeper
- CHD stock overview
- CHD income statement
- CHD valuation and score
- CLX stock overview
- CLX income statement
- CLX valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.