Sonoco Products vs Smurfit Westrock
SON and SW side by side, both in paper and allied products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How SON and SW compare
Smurfit Westrock is the larger company, worth 4.7 times as much as Sonoco Products ($23.1B against $4.9B).
Sonoco Products grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.6% versus 1.1% for Smurfit Westrock).
Smurfit Westrock keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.5% compared with −3.1% at Sonoco Products.
Both pay dividends: Sonoco Products yields 3.2% and Smurfit Westrock 3.1%.
Smurfit Westrock scores higher on the StockData Score (9 against 7 for Sonoco Products), 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 | SON | SW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.9B | $23.1B |
| Share price | $49.60 | $44.03 |
| Change, 1 year | 22.3% | 24.0% |
| Change, 5 years | −18.8% | −16.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.72 | 1.05 |
| Employees | 23K | 97K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 9 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 49.5× |
| P/S | 0.7× (better) | 0.7× |
| P/B | 1.8× | 1.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.4× | 8.7× (better) |
| P/FCF | 14.0× (better) | 27.1× |
| FCF yield | 7.2% (better) | 3.7% |
| Fair value | $42.24 | $33.09 |
| Margin of safety | −17.4% (better) | −33.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.6% (better) | 1.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.0% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −136% | −36.8% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −137% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 37.5% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.2% (better) | 17.4% |
| Operating margin | 2.7% | 4.6% (better) |
| Net margin | −3.1% | 1.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | 4.8% (better) | 2.7% |
| Return on equity | −7.4% | 2.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 2.1% | 3.0% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.53 | 0.78 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.63 | 3.18 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 1.1× | 1.7× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.18 | 1.48 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.61 (better) | 1.48 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.2% (better) | 3.1% |
| Payout ratio | – | 198% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.2% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.15% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 3.4% (better) | 3.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 98.6% | 96.0% |
| Held by insiders | 1.3% | 0.54% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $884K (better) | −$3.4M |
| Short interest, % of float | 11.9% | 4.7% |
Go deeper
- SON stock overview
- SON income statement
- SON valuation and score
- SW stock overview
- SW income statement
- SW valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.