Campbell'S vs McCormick
CPB and MKC 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 CPB and MKC compare
McCormick is the larger company, worth 2.0 times as much as Campbell'S ($12.7B against $6.4B).
On earnings, McCormick is cheaper: it trades at 8.6× trailing earnings, against 16.4× for Campbell'S.
McCormick grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.2% versus −5.0% for Campbell'S).
McCormick keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.4% compared with 4.1% at Campbell'S.
Both pay dividends: Campbell'S yields 6.6% and McCormick 4.1%.
McCormick scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 13 for Campbell'S), 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 | CPB | MKC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.4B | $12.7B |
| Share price | $21.42 | $47.29 |
| Change, 1 year | −28.6% | −25.9% |
| Change, 5 years | −47.4% | −41.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.11 | 0.41 |
| Employees | 14K | 14K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 21 (better) |
| Valuation score | 6 | 6 |
| Growth score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 5 | 5 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 16.4× | 8.6× (better) |
| P/S | 0.7× (better) | 1.7× |
| P/B | 1.7× (better) | 1.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.4× (better) | 13.8× |
| P/FCF | 9.4× (better) | 13.7× |
| PEG | – | 1.66 |
| FCF yield | 10.6% (better) | 7.3% |
| Fair value | $28.53 | $90.06 |
| Margin of safety | 24.9% | 47.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −5.0% | 13.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.8% | 4.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −33.1% | 91.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −34.8% | 91.3% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −16.8% | 1.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 28.1% | 39.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 8.7% | 13.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 4.1% | 19.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | 7.0% | 12.0% (better) |
| Return on equity | 10.4% | 23.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.1% | 6.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.85 | 0.72 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.33 | 3.59 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 2.6× | 4.6× (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.82 (better) | 0.66 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.50 | 1.80 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 6.6% (better) | 4.1% |
| Payout ratio | 117% | 34.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 1.3% | 7.7% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.41% (better) | 0.13% |
| Shareholder yield | 7.0% (better) | 4.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 62.1% | 89.8% |
| Held by insiders | 38.5% | 1.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$390K (better) | −$24.9M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 19.5% | – |
Go deeper
- CPB stock overview
- CPB income statement
- CPB valuation and score
- MKC stock overview
- MKC income statement
- MKC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.