Compare Stocks

2 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

GIS vs K

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
GIS
General Mills, Inc.

Packaged Foods

Consumer DefensiveNYSE • US
Market Cap$18.71B
5Y Perf.-44.4%
K
Kellanova

Food Confectioners

Consumer DefensiveNYSE • US
Market Cap$29.03B
5Y Perf.+36.5%

GIS vs K — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
GIS logoGIS
K logoK
IndustryPackaged FoodsFood Confectioners
Market Cap$18.71B$29.03B
Revenue (TTM)$18.37B$12.64B
Net Income (TTM)$2.21B$1.33B
Gross Margin33.0%36.1%
Operating Margin19.1%14.7%
Forward P/E10.2x22.1x
Total Debt$15.30B$6.34B
Cash & Equiv.$364M$694M

GIS vs KLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

GIS
K
StockMay 20May 26Return
General Mills, Inc. (GIS)10055.6-44.4%
Kellanova (K)100136.5+36.5%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: GIS vs K

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: GIS leads in 4 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and valuation and capital efficiency. Kellanova is the stronger pick specifically for capital preservation and lower volatility and recent price momentum and sentiment. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
GIS
General Mills, Inc.
The Income Pick

GIS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.

  • Dividend streak 5 yrs, beta -0.04, yield 6.8%
  • Rev growth -1.9%, EPS growth -4.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.9%
  • Beta -0.04, yield 6.8%, current ratio 0.67x
Best for: income & stability and growth exposure
K
Kellanova
The Long-Run Compounder

K is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.

  • 48.3% 10Y total return vs GIS's -9.4%
  • Lower volatility, beta 0.05, current ratio 0.81x
  • PEG 3.27 vs GIS's 3.57
Best for: long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthGIS logoGIS-1.9% revenue growth vs K's -2.8%
ValueGIS logoGISLower P/E (10.2x vs 22.1x)
Quality / MarginsGIS logoGIS12.1% margin vs K's 10.6%
Stability / SafetyK logoKLower D/E ratio (163.4% vs 166.1%)
DividendsGIS logoGIS6.8% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs K's 2.7%
Momentum (1Y)K logoK+3.2% vs GIS's -31.3%
Efficiency (ROA)K logoK8.4% ROA vs GIS's 6.8%, ROIC 14.7% vs 10.6%

GIS vs K — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

GISGeneral Mills, Inc.
FY 2025
Snacks
21.5%$4.2B
Cereal
15.8%$3.1B
Convenient meals
14.5%$2.8B
Pet Segment
13.3%$2.6B
Dough
12.2%$2.4B
Baking mixes and ingredients
10.0%$1.9B
Yogurt
7.1%$1.4B
Other (2)
5.7%$1.1B
KKellanova
FY 2024
Retail Channel Snacks
63.7%$8.1B
Retail Channel Cereal
21.2%$2.7B
Frozen And Specialty Channels
8.6%$1.1B
NoodlesandOther
6.5%$833M

GIS vs K — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLGISLAGGINGK

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

Evenly matched — GIS and K each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

GIS and K operate at a comparable scale, with $18.4B and $12.6B in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 12.1% (GIS) to 10.6% (K). On growth, K holds the edge at +0.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricGIS logoGISGeneral Mills, In…K logoKKellanova
RevenueTrailing 12 months$18.4B$12.6B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$3.9B$2.2B
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$2.2B$1.3B
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$1.7B$650M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+33.0%+36.1%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+19.1%+14.7%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+12.1%+10.6%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+9.0%+5.1%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-8.4%+0.3%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-50.0%-15.0%
Evenly matched — GIS and K each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

GIS leads this category, winning 7 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 8.6x trailing earnings, GIS trades at a 60% valuation discount to K's 21.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), GIS offers better value at 2.99x vs K's 3.19x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricGIS logoGISGeneral Mills, In…K logoKKellanova
Market CapShares × price$18.7B$29.0B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$33.6B$34.7B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS8.55x21.51x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.10.24x22.06x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate2.99x3.19x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple8.75x15.48x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue0.96x2.28x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share2.12x7.44x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF8.16x25.65x
GIS leads this category, winning 7 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

K leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.

K delivers a 31.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $32 in annual profit, vs $24 for GIS. K carries lower financial leverage with a 1.63x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GIS's 1.66x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), K scores 7/9 vs GIS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricGIS logoGISGeneral Mills, In…K logoKKellanova
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+23.7%+31.7%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+6.8%+8.4%
ROICReturn on invested capital+10.6%+14.7%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+13.3%+17.4%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–957
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage1.66x1.63x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$14.9B$5.6B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$364M$694M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$15.3B$6.3B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense5.01x6.41x
K leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

K leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in K five years ago would be worth $14,843 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,302 for GIS. Over the past 12 months, K leads with a +3.2% total return vs GIS's -31.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors K at 10.3% vs GIS's -22.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricGIS logoGISGeneral Mills, In…K logoKKellanova
YTD ReturnYear-to-date-20.6%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months-31.3%+3.2%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-53.0%+34.4%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-27.0%+48.4%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-9.4%+48.3%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return-22.2%+10.3%
K leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — GIS and K each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

GIS is the less volatile stock with a -0.04 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than K's 0.05 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. K currently trades 99.7% from its 52-week high vs GIS's 63.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricGIS logoGISGeneral Mills, In…K logoKKellanova
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500-0.04x0.05x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$55.35$83.65
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$33.58$76.48
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+63.4%+99.7%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10036.460.6
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded8.6M42.7M
Evenly matched — GIS and K each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

GIS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

Wall Street rates GIS as "Hold" and K as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 32.8% upside for GIS (target: $47) vs -11.3% for K (target: $74). For income investors, GIS offers the higher dividend yield at 6.85% vs K's 2.69%.

MetricGIS logoGISGeneral Mills, In…K logoKKellanova
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellHoldHold
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$46.58$74.03
# AnalystsCovering analysts3434
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+6.8%+2.7%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises50
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$2.40$2.24
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap+6.4%0.0%
GIS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

GIS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). K leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 2 tied.

Best OverallGeneral Mills, Inc. (GIS)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

GIS vs K: Frequently Asked Questions

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is GIS or K a better buy right now?

For growth investors, General Mills, Inc.

(GIS) is the stronger pick with -1. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 8% for Kellanova (K). General Mills, Inc. (GIS) offers the better valuation at 8. 6x trailing P/E (10. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate General Mills, Inc. (GIS) a "Hold" — based on 34 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — GIS or K?

On trailing P/E, General Mills, Inc.

(GIS) is the cheapest at 8. 6x versus Kellanova at 21. 5x. On forward P/E, General Mills, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 2x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Kellanova wins at 3. 27x versus General Mills, Inc. 's 3. 57x.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — GIS or K?

Over the past 5 years, Kellanova (K) delivered a total return of +48.

4%, compared to -27. 0% for General Mills, Inc. (GIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: K returned +48. 3% versus GIS's -9. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — GIS or K?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), General Mills, Inc.

(GIS) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 04β versus Kellanova's 0. 05β — meaning K is approximately -253% more volatile than GIS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Kellanova (K) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 163% versus 166% for General Mills, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — GIS or K?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), General Mills, Inc.

(GIS) is pulling ahead at -1. 9% versus -2. 8% for Kellanova (K). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Kellanova grew EPS 40. 6% year-over-year, compared to -4. 9% for General Mills, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, K leads at 2. 8% annualised revenue growth. 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — GIS or K?

General Mills, Inc.

(GIS) is the more profitable company, earning 11. 8% net margin versus 10. 5% for Kellanova — meaning it keeps 11. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GIS leads at 17. 0% versus 14. 7% for K. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — K leads at 36. 9%, 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.

07

Is GIS or K more undervalued right now?

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Kellanova (K) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 3. 27x versus General Mills, Inc. 's 3. 57x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, General Mills, Inc. (GIS) trades at 10. 2x forward P/E versus 22. 1x for Kellanova — 11. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GIS: 32. 8% to $46. 58.

08

Which pays a better dividend — GIS or K?

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

General Mills, Inc. (GIS) offers the highest yield at 6. 8%, versus 2. 7% for Kellanova (K).

09

Is GIS or K better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, General Mills, Inc.

(GIS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 04), 6. 8% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GIS: -9. 4%, K: +48. 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.

10

What are the main differences between GIS and K?

Both stocks operate in the Consumer Defensive sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: GIS is a mid-cap deep-value stock; K is a mid-cap quality compounder 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.

Stocks Like

GIS

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Consumer Defensive
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 7%
  • Dividend Yield > 2.7%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

K

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Consumer Defensive
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 6%
  • Dividend Yield > 1.0%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform GIS and K on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(GIS: -8.4% · K: 0.3%)
Net Margin>
%
(GIS: 12.1% · K: 10.6%)
P/E Ratio<
x
(GIS: 8.6x · K: 21.5x)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.