Hormel Foods vs Pilgrims Pride
HRL and PPC 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 HRL and PPC compare
Hormel Foods is the larger company, worth 1.8 times as much as Pilgrims Pride ($12.2B against $6.7B).
On earnings, Pilgrims Pride is cheaper: it trades at 20.8× trailing earnings, against 35.1× for Hormel Foods.
Hormel Foods grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (0.73% versus −0.12% for Pilgrims Pride).
Hormel Foods keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.8% compared with 1.7% at Pilgrims Pride.
Hormel Foods pays a dividend yielding 5.3%; Pilgrims Pride does not pay one.
Hormel Foods scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 9 for Pilgrims Pride), 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 | HRL | PPC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $12.2B | $6.7B |
| Share price | $22.09 | $28.12 |
| Change, 1 year | −0.81% | −25.9% |
| Change, 5 years | −48.2% | −1.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.19 | 0.35 |
| Employees | 20K | 63K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 35.1× | 20.8× (better) |
| P/S | 1.0× | 0.4× (better) |
| P/B | 1.5× (better) | 1.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.7× | 8.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | 15.6× | 14.4× (better) |
| PEG | – | 1.54 |
| FCF yield | 6.4% | 7.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $18.08 | $33.60 |
| Margin of safety | −22.2% | 16.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.73% (better) | −0.12% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.7% | 8.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −54.6% (better) | −74.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −54.0% (better) | −73.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −12.1% | 63.4% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 15.7% (better) | 7.9% |
| Operating margin | 4.7% (better) | 3.4% |
| Net margin | 2.8% (better) | 1.7% |
| FCF margin | 6.4% (better) | 2.5% |
| Return on equity | 4.3% | 8.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 3.7% | 6.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.36 (better) | 0.88 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.35 | 2.22 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 7.3× (better) | 3.9× |
| Current ratio | 1.88 (better) | 1.55 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.33 (better) | 2.92 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 5.3% (better) | 0.00% |
| Payout ratio | 187% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.5% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 5.3% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 43.8% | 20.6% |
| Held by insiders | 0.54% | 82.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$616K | −$303K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.2% | 13.8% |
Go deeper
- HRL stock overview
- HRL income statement
- HRL valuation and score
- PPC stock overview
- PPC income statement
- PPC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.