Kraft Heinz vs Lamb Weston
KHC and LW 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 KHC and LW compare
Kraft Heinz is the larger company, worth 3.9 times as much as Lamb Weston ($28.9B against $7.4B).
Lamb Weston grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (2.6% versus −1.6% for Kraft Heinz).
Lamb Weston keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.8% compared with −13.6% at Kraft Heinz.
Both pay dividends: Kraft Heinz yields 6.6% and Lamb Weston 2.8%.
Lamb Weston scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 11 for Kraft Heinz), 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 | KHC | LW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $28.9B | $7.4B |
| Share price | $24.34 | $54.08 |
| Change, 1 year | −0.16% | −14.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −35.7% | −6.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.18 | 0.52 |
| Employees | 35K | 10K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 3 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 29.4× |
| P/S | 1.2× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 0.8× (better) | 4.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 12.2× |
| P/FCF | 7.6× (better) | 18.1× |
| FCF yield | 13.2% (better) | 5.5% |
| Fair value | $35.82 | $61.63 |
| Margin of safety | 32.0% (better) | 12.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −1.6% | 2.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −0.97% | 12.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −13.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −12.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −0.75% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 33.4% (better) | 19.4% |
| Operating margin | −12.8% | 7.8% (better) |
| Net margin | −13.6% | 3.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 15.3% (better) | 6.2% |
| Return on equity | −8.8% | 14.2% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −4.5% | 6.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.53 (better) | 2.17 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 4.09 |
| Interest coverage | −4.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.06 | 1.45 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.50 | 2.61 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 6.6% (better) | 2.8% |
| Payout ratio | – | 81.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 10 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.00% | 10.0% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.10% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 6.7% (better) | 2.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 90.2% | 94.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.49% | 10.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.0M | $19.4M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.9% | 5.8% |
Go deeper
- KHC stock overview
- KHC income statement
- KHC valuation and score
- LW stock overview
- LW income statement
- LW valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.