Flowers Foods vs Simply Good Foods
FLO and SMPL 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 FLO and SMPL compare
Flowers Foods and Simply Good Foods are about the same size, with market caps of $1.2B and $1.1B.
Flowers Foods grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (0.62% versus −6.5% for Simply Good Foods).
Flowers Foods keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 0.58% compared with −11.5% at Simply Good Foods.
Flowers Foods pays a dividend yielding 13.5%; Simply Good Foods does not pay one.
Flowers Foods scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 8 for Simply Good Foods), 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 | FLO | SMPL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.2B | $1.1B |
| Share price | $5.53 | $12.57 |
| Change, 1 year | −52.0% | −35.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −79.4% | −67.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.19 | 0.45 |
| Employees | 10K | 282 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 39.5× | – |
| P/S | 0.2× (better) | 0.8× |
| P/B | 0.9× | 0.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.0× | – |
| P/FCF | 3.5× (better) | 7.0× |
| FCF yield | 28.5% (better) | 14.4% |
| Fair value | $13.04 | $28.37 |
| Margin of safety | 57.6% (better) | 55.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.62% (better) | −6.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.7% | 6.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −84.5% (better) | −250% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −84.8% (better) | −266% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −11.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 48.4% (better) | 32.6% |
| Operating margin | 2.1% (better) | −13.2% |
| Net margin | 0.58% (better) | −11.5% |
| FCF margin | 6.5% | 11.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 2.2% (better) | −9.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 2.3% (better) | −7.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.27 | 0.24 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.80 | – |
| Interest coverage | 1.4× (better) | −8.4× |
| Current ratio | 1.27 | 5.57 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.89 | 2.00 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 13.5% | – |
| Payout ratio | 533% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 17 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.34% | 19.5% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 13.8% | 19.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 104% | 99.0% |
| Held by insiders | 7.0% | 10.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$3.9M | $1.1M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 25.7% | 12.7% |
Go deeper
- FLO stock overview
- FLO income statement
- FLO valuation and score
- SMPL stock overview
- SMPL income statement
- SMPL valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.