AMCON Distributing vs Performance Food
DIT and PFGC side by side, both in groceries and related products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How DIT and PFGC compare
Performance Food is the larger company, worth 289 times as much as AMCON Distributing ($17.5B against $60.6M).
On earnings, AMCON Distributing is cheaper: it trades at 24.6× trailing earnings, against 44.3× for Performance Food.
AMCON Distributing grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.9% versus 5.9% for Performance Food).
Performance Food keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 0.57% compared with 0.08% at AMCON Distributing.
AMCON Distributing pays a dividend yielding 0.58%; Performance Food does not pay one.
AMCON Distributing scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 8 for Performance Food), 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 | DIT | PFGC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $60.6M | $17.5B |
| Share price | $62.10 | $111.17 |
| Change, 1 year | −20.7% | 15.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −44.7% | 153% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.15 | 0.94 |
| Employees | 1,465 | 44K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 24.6× (better) | 44.3× |
| P/S | 0.0× (better) | 0.3× |
| P/B | 0.5× (better) | 3.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 3.0× (better) | 12.8× |
| P/FCF | – | 15.8× |
| FCF yield | −22.6% | 6.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $216.87 | $89.17 |
| Margin of safety | 71.4% (better) | −24.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.9% (better) | 5.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.3% | 17.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 315% (better) | 21.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 306% (better) | 20.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −32.7% | 50.2% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 6.1% | 12.0% (better) |
| Operating margin | 0.44% | 1.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 0.08% | 0.57% (better) |
| FCF margin | −0.44% | 1.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 2.1% | 8.2% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.8% (better) | 6.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.09 (better) | 1.02 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.44 (better) | 2.91 |
| Interest coverage | 1.4× | 2.3× (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.34 (better) | 1.61 |
| Altman Z-score | 8.67 (better) | 4.91 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.58% | – |
| Payout ratio | 27.7% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −29.4% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 0.58% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 10.8% | 101% |
| Held by insiders | 75.0% | 2.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$28.0M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 0.41% | 3.6% |
Go deeper
- DIT stock overview
- DIT income statement
- DIT valuation and score
- PFGC stock overview
- PFGC income statement
- PFGC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.