McCormick vs Utz Brands
MKC and UTZ 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 MKC and UTZ compare
McCormick is the larger company, worth 6.1 times as much as Utz Brands ($12.6B against $2.1B).
McCormick grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.2% versus 0.48% for Utz Brands).
McCormick keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.4% compared with −2.7% at Utz Brands.
Both pay dividends: McCormick yields 4.1% and Utz Brands 1.8%.
McCormick scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 4 for Utz Brands), 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 | MKC | UTZ |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $12.6B | $2.1B |
| Share price | $46.96 | $14.28 |
| Change, 1 year | −28.7% | 36.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −44.1% | −10.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.40 | 0.43 |
| Employees | 14K | 3,100 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 21 (better) | 4 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 8.5× | – |
| P/S | 1.6× | 1.4× (better) |
| P/B | 1.8× (better) | 3.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.7× (better) | 46.3× |
| P/FCF | 13.6× (better) | 857× |
| PEG | 1.65 | – |
| FCF yield | 7.3% (better) | 0.12% |
| Fair value | $90.11 | $4.83 |
| Margin of safety | 47.9% (better) | −196% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.2% (better) | 0.48% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.1% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 91.6% (better) | −789% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 91.3% (better) | −714% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 1.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 39.1% (better) | 24.6% |
| Operating margin | 13.4% (better) | −1.1% |
| Net margin | 19.4% (better) | −2.7% |
| FCF margin | 12.0% (better) | 0.17% |
| Return on equity | 23.4% (better) | −5.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 6.9% (better) | −0.81% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.72 (better) | 1.30 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.59 (better) | 10.75 |
| Interest coverage | 4.6× (better) | −0.4× |
| Current ratio | 0.66 | 1.07 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.80 (better) | 1.14 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.1% (better) | 1.8% |
| Payout ratio | 34.1% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.13% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 4.2% (better) | 1.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 89.8% | 53.5% |
| Held by insiders | 1.1% | 43.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$18.6M | $13.6K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 6.4% |
Go deeper
- MKC stock overview
- MKC income statement
- MKC valuation and score
- UTZ stock overview
- UTZ income statement
- UTZ valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.