Colgate Palmolive vs Clorox
CL 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 CL and CLX compare
Colgate Palmolive is the larger company, worth 6.0 times as much as Clorox ($79.2B against $13.2B).
On earnings, Clorox is cheaper: it trades at 19.7× trailing earnings, against 39.1× for Colgate Palmolive.
Clorox grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (6.3% versus 5.9% for Colgate Palmolive).
Colgate Palmolive keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 9.6% compared with 9.4% at Clorox.
Both pay dividends: Colgate Palmolive yields 1.6% and Clorox 3.4%.
Clorox scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 10 for Colgate Palmolive), 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 | CL | CLX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $79.2B | $13.2B |
| Share price | $99.67 | $109.46 |
| Change, 1 year | 26.9% | 4.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 29.1% | −34.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.29 | 0.51 |
| Employees | 34K | 9,200 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 39.1× | 19.7× (better) |
| P/S | 3.7× | 1.8× (better) |
| P/B | 275× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 22.4× | 14.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | 20.9× (better) | 29.2× |
| PEG | 5.37 | 0.33 (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.8% (better) | 3.4% |
| Fair value | $78.87 | $204.70 |
| Margin of safety | −26.4% | 46.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.9% | 6.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.4% (better) | −1.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −29.4% | −14.4% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −28.6% | −12.7% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −3.5% | −2.9% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 60.6% (better) | 41.9% |
| Operating margin | 14.8% | – |
| Net margin | 9.6% (better) | 9.4% |
| FCF margin | 17.8% (better) | 6.3% |
| Return on equity | 359% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 36.1% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 24.94 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.49 (better) | 3.78 |
| Interest coverage | 12.6× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.96 (better) | 0.65 |
| Altman Z-score | 7.12 (better) | 1.84 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.6% | 3.4% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 88.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 17 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 3.5% (better) | 2.2% |
| Buyback yield | 1.7% (better) | 0.96% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.3% | 4.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.6% | 86.3% |
| Held by insiders | 0.15% | 0.68% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$64.1M | $829K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.3% | 9.0% |
Go deeper
- CL stock overview
- CL income statement
- CL 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.