Clorox vs Haleon
CLX and HLN 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 CLX and HLN compare
Clorox grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (6.3% versus −1.8% for Haleon).
Haleon keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 15.1% compared with 9.4% at Clorox.
Clorox pays a dividend yielding 3.4%; Haleon does not pay one.
Clorox scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 9 for Haleon), 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 | CLX | HLN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $13.1B | – |
| Share price | $108.20 | $9.09 |
| Change, 1 year | 3.0% | −7.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −35.2% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.51 | 0.16 |
| Employees | 9,200 | – |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.5× | – |
| P/S | 1.8× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.9× | – |
| P/FCF | 28.9× | – |
| PEG | 0.33 | – |
| FCF yield | 3.5% | – |
| Fair value | $189.01 | – |
| Margin of safety | 42.8% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.3% (better) | −1.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −1.8% | 2.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −14.4% | 15.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −12.7% | 17.8% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −2.9% | 8.3% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 41.9% | 64.2% (better) |
| Operating margin | – | 21.9% |
| Net margin | 9.4% | 15.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 6.3% | 21.0% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 10.2% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 7.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.50 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.78 | 2.68 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 7.1× |
| Current ratio | 0.65 | 0.69 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.82 | – |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.4% | – |
| Payout ratio | 88.9% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 17 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.2% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.97% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 4.4% | – |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 86.3% | 6.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.68% | 0.00% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $829K | – |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.0% | – |
Go deeper
- CLX stock overview
- CLX income statement
- CLX valuation and score
- HLN stock overview
- HLN income statement
- HLN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.