Kraft Heinz vs Philip Morris International
KHC and PM side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How KHC and PM compare
Philip Morris International is the larger company, worth 11 times as much as Kraft Heinz ($325B against $28.9B).
Philip Morris International grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.9% versus −1.6% for Kraft Heinz).
Philip Morris International keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 25.6% compared with −13.6% at Kraft Heinz.
Both pay dividends: Kraft Heinz yields 6.6% and Philip Morris International 2.9%.
Philip Morris International scores higher on the StockData Score (13 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 | PM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $28.9B | $325B |
| Share price | $24.34 | $208.79 |
| Change, 1 year | −0.16% | 42.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −35.7% | 121% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.18 | 0.33 |
| Employees | 35K | 85K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 30.0× |
| P/S | 1.2× (better) | 7.6× |
| P/B | 0.8× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 20.5× |
| P/FCF | 7.6× (better) | 25.6× |
| PEG | – | 3.89 |
| FCF yield | 13.2% (better) | 3.9% |
| Fair value | $35.82 | $136.36 |
| Margin of safety | 32.0% (better) | −53.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −1.6% | 8.9% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −0.97% | 7.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 32.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 32.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 7.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 33.4% | 67.5% (better) |
| Operating margin | −12.8% | 37.7% (better) |
| Net margin | −13.6% | 25.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 15.3% | 29.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | −8.8% | – |
| Return on invested capital | −4.5% | 36.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.53 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.38 |
| Interest coverage | −4.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.06 (better) | 0.98 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.50 | 4.74 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 6.6% (better) | 2.9% |
| Payout ratio | – | 82.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.00% | 3.5% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.10% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 6.7% (better) | 2.9% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 90.2% | 84.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.49% | 0.17% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.0M (better) | −$28.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | 6 | 6 |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.9% | 1.1% |
Go deeper
- KHC stock overview
- KHC income statement
- KHC valuation and score
- PM stock overview
- PM income statement
- PM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.