Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
FLO vs NWFL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
FLO vs NWFL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $1.82B | $278M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $5.26B | $136M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $84M | $28M |
| Gross Margin | 48.1% | 63.6% |
| Operating Margin | 6.0% | 26.1% |
| Forward P/E | 10.4x | 8.7x |
| Total Debt | $2.33B | $74M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $12M | $44M |
FLO vs NWFL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flowers Foods, Inc. (FLO) | 100 | 36.5 | -63.5% |
| Norwood Financial C… (NWFL) | 100 | 123.2 | +23.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FLO vs NWFL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FLO is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 19 yrs, beta 0.32, yield 11.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.32, current ratio 0.75x
- Beta 0.32, yield 11.4%, current ratio 0.75x
NWFL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 34.2%, EPS growth 152.5%
- 116.3% 10Y total return vs FLO's -13.0%
- 34.2% NII/revenue growth vs FLO's 3.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 34.2% NII/revenue growth vs FLO's 3.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.7x vs 10.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs FLO's 1.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.32 vs NWFL's 0.72 | |
| Dividends | 11.4% yield, 19-year raise streak, vs NWFL's 4.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +23.2% vs FLO's -44.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.0% ROA vs NWFL's 1.2%, ROIC 8.1% vs 7.3% |
FLO vs NWFL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FLO vs NWFL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NWFL leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FLO is the larger business by revenue, generating $5.3B annually — 38.6x NWFL's $136M. NWFL is the more profitable business, keeping 20.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FLO's 1.6%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $5.3B | $136M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $482M | $37M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $84M | $28M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $329M | $30M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +48.1% | +63.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.0% | +26.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.6% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +6.3% | +21.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.0% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.6% | +152.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — FLO and NWFL each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.0x trailing earnings, NWFL trades at a 54% valuation discount to FLO's 21.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, FLO's 8.1x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than NWFL's 8.4x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.8B | $278M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.1B | $308M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 21.55x | 9.96x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.37x | 8.74x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.29x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.08x | 8.43x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.35x | 2.05x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.40x | 1.14x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 5.70x | 9.63x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NWFL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NWFL delivers a 12.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $6 for FLO. NWFL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.31x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FLO's 1.79x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NWFL scores 7/9 vs FLO's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.4% | +12.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.0% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.1% | +7.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.4% | +11.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.79x | 0.31x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.3B | $30M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $12M | $44M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.3B | $74M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.52x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NWFL leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NWFL five years ago would be worth $14,420 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $5,355 for FLO. Over the past 12 months, NWFL leads with a +23.2% total return vs FLO's -44.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NWFL at 9.4% vs FLO's -26.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -17.8% | +10.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -44.8% | +23.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.7% | +31.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -46.5% | +44.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -13.0% | +116.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -26.2% | +9.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FLO and NWFL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FLO is the less volatile stock with a 0.32 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NWFL's 0.72 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NWFL currently trades 93.6% from its 52-week high vs FLO's 48.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.32x | 0.72x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $17.68 | $32.23 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.86 | $23.70 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +48.8% | +93.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.1 | 48.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.0M | 22K |
Analyst Outlook
FLO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates FLO as "Hold" and NWFL as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 16.0% upside for FLO (target: $10) vs 9.4% for NWFL (target: $33). For income investors, FLO offers the higher dividend yield at 11.45% vs NWFL's 4.16%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $10.00 | $33.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 20 | 1 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +11.4% | +4.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 19 | 9 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.99 | $1.25 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.3% | +0.1% |
NWFL leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). FLO leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
FLO vs NWFL: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FLO or NWFL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Norwood Financial Corp.
(NWFL) is the stronger pick with 34. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 0% for Flowers Foods, Inc. (FLO). Norwood Financial Corp. (NWFL) offers the better valuation at 10. 0x trailing P/E (8. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Flowers Foods, Inc. (FLO) a "Hold" — based on 20 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — FLO or NWFL?
On trailing P/E, Norwood Financial Corp.
(NWFL) is the cheapest at 10. 0x versus Flowers Foods, Inc. at 21. 6x. On forward P/E, Norwood Financial Corp. is actually cheaper at 8. 7x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FLO or NWFL?
Over the past 5 years, Norwood Financial Corp.
(NWFL) delivered a total return of +44. 2%, compared to -46. 5% for Flowers Foods, Inc. (FLO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NWFL returned +116. 3% versus FLO's -13. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — FLO or NWFL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Flowers Foods, Inc.
(FLO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 32β versus Norwood Financial Corp. 's 0. 72β — meaning NWFL is approximately 124% more volatile than FLO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Norwood Financial Corp. (NWFL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 31% versus 179% for Flowers Foods, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FLO or NWFL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Norwood Financial Corp.
(NWFL) is pulling ahead at 34. 2% versus 3. 0% for Flowers Foods, Inc. (FLO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Norwood Financial Corp. grew EPS 152. 5% year-over-year, compared to -65. 8% for Flowers Foods, Inc.. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — FLO or NWFL?
Norwood Financial Corp.
(NWFL) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus 1. 6% for Flowers Foods, Inc. — meaning it keeps 20. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NWFL leads at 26. 1% versus 6. 6% for FLO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NWFL leads at 63. 6%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is FLO or NWFL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Norwood Financial Corp.
(NWFL) trades at 8. 7x forward P/E versus 10. 4x for Flowers Foods, Inc. — 1. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FLO: 16. 0% to $10. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — FLO or NWFL?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Flowers Foods, Inc. (FLO) offers the highest yield at 11. 4%, versus 4. 2% for Norwood Financial Corp. (NWFL).
09Is FLO or NWFL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Flowers Foods, Inc.
(FLO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 32), 11. 4% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FLO: -13. 0%, NWFL: +116. 3%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between FLO and NWFL?
These companies operate in different sectors (FLO (Consumer Defensive) and NWFL (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: FLO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; NWFL is a small-cap high-growth stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.