Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
SOWG vs HIMS vs SMPL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Equipment & Services
Packaged Foods
SOWG vs HIMS vs SMPL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Medical - Equipment & Services | Packaged Foods |
| Market Cap | $1M | $6.63B | $1.24B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $2.35B | $1.45B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-41M | $128M | $91M |
| Gross Margin | — | 69.7% | 34.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | 4.6% | 14.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 58.3x | 7.5x |
| Total Debt | $2M | $1.12B | $304M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1M | $229M | $98M |
SOWG vs HIMS vs SMPL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sow Good Inc. (SOWG) | 100 | 2.2 | -97.8% |
| Hims & Hers Health,… (HIMS) | 100 | 284.6 | +184.6% |
| The Simply Good Foo… (SMPL) | 100 | 72.0 | -28.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SOWG vs HIMS vs SMPL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SOWG plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
HIMS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 59.0%, EPS growth -3.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 64.5%
- 161.9% 10Y total return vs SMPL's 3.7%
- 59.0% revenue growth vs SOWG's -100.0%
SMPL is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 0.38
- Lower volatility, beta 0.38, Low D/E 16.8%, current ratio 3.64x
- Beta 0.38, current ratio 3.64x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 59.0% revenue growth vs SOWG's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.5x vs 58.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 6.3% margin vs SOWG's -4.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.38 vs HIMS's 2.40, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 3 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | -51.0% vs SOWG's -87.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.0% ROA vs SOWG's -123.1%, ROIC 10.7% vs -21.5% |
SOWG vs HIMS vs SMPL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
SOWG vs HIMS vs SMPL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HIMS leads in 2 of 6 categories
SMPL leads 1 • SOWG leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — HIMS and SMPL each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HIMS and SOWG operate at a comparable scale, with $2.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 6.3% (SMPL) to 5.5% (HIMS). On growth, HIMS holds the edge at +28.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $2.3B | $1.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$5M | $164M | $231M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$41M | $128M | $91M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$5M | $73M | $174M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +69.7% | +34.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +4.6% | +14.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +5.5% | +6.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +3.1% | +12.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.3% | +28.4% | -0.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.9% | -27.3% | -31.6% |
Valuation Metrics
SMPL leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.2x trailing earnings, SMPL trades at a 76% valuation discount to HIMS's 50.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, SMPL's 6.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HIMS's 42.7x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1M | $6.6B | $1.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1M | $7.5B | $1.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.02x | 50.32x | 12.20x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 58.29x | 7.45x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.51x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 42.68x | 5.97x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.82x | 0.86x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 12.25x | 0.70x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 89.61x | 7.86x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HIMS leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HIMS delivers a 23.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $24 in annual profit, vs $-2 for SOWG. SMPL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HIMS's 2.07x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SMPL scores 5/9 vs SOWG's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.1% | +23.7% | +5.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -123.1% | +6.0% | +3.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -21.5% | +10.7% | +8.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -29.4% | +10.9% | +9.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 2.07x | 0.17x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $95,146 | $892M | $206M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1M | $229M | $98M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2M | $1.1B | $304M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -33.23x | — | 6.77x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HIMS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HIMS five years ago would be worth $23,764 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $151 for SOWG. Over the past 12 months, HIMS leads with a -51.0% total return vs SOWG's -87.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HIMS at 29.4% vs SOWG's -73.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -76.6% | -23.2% | -36.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -87.0% | -51.0% | -64.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.1% | +116.6% | -67.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.5% | +137.6% | -64.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.6% | +161.9% | +3.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -73.3% | +29.4% | -31.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — HIMS and SMPL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SMPL is the less volatile stock with a 0.38 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HIMS's 2.40 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HIMS currently trades 36.4% from its 52-week high vs SOWG's 3.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.07x | 2.48x | 0.34x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $31.80 | $70.43 | $36.92 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.70 | $13.74 | $10.21 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +3.8% | +36.4% | +33.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 21.2 | 54.5 | 42.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 374K | 34.9M | 2.8M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HIMS as "Hold", SMPL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 62.1% upside for SMPL (target: $20) vs 2.1% for HIMS (target: $26).
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $26.20 | $20.17 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 19 | 24 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.4% | +4.1% |
HIMS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). SMPL leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
SOWG vs HIMS vs SMPL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SOWG or HIMS or SMPL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Hims & Hers Health, Inc.
(HIMS) is the stronger pick with 59. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Sow Good Inc. (SOWG). The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) offers the better valuation at 12. 2x trailing P/E (7. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) a "Buy" — based on 24 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 — SOWG or HIMS or SMPL?
On trailing P/E, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the cheapest at 12.
2x versus Hims & Hers Health, Inc. at 50. 3x. On forward P/E, The Simply Good Foods Company is actually cheaper at 7. 5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SOWG or HIMS or SMPL?
Over the past 5 years, Hims & Hers Health, Inc.
(HIMS) delivered a total return of +137. 6%, compared to -98. 5% for Sow Good Inc. (SOWG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HIMS returned +188. 5% versus SOWG's -99. 5%. 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 — SOWG or HIMS or SMPL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
34β versus Hims & Hers Health, Inc. 's 2. 48β — meaning HIMS is approximately 623% more volatile than SMPL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 2% for Hims & Hers Health, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SOWG or HIMS or SMPL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hims & Hers Health, Inc.
(HIMS) is pulling ahead at 59. 0% versus -100. 0% for Sow Good Inc. (SOWG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hims & Hers Health, Inc. grew EPS -3. 8% year-over-year, compared to -760. 0% for Sow Good Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HIMS leads at 64. 5% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — SOWG or HIMS or SMPL?
The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the more profitable company, earning 7.
1% net margin versus 0. 0% for Sow Good Inc. — meaning it keeps 7. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SMPL leads at 15. 1% versus 0. 0% for SOWG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HIMS leads at 59. 3%, 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 SOWG or HIMS or SMPL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) trades at 7.
5x forward P/E versus 58. 3x for Hims & Hers Health, Inc. — 50. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SMPL: 62. 1% to $20. 17.
08Which pays a better dividend — SOWG or HIMS or SMPL?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is SOWG or HIMS or SMPL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
34)). Hims & Hers Health, Inc. (HIMS) carries a higher beta of 2. 48 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SMPL: +2. 2%, HIMS: +188. 5%), 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 SOWG and HIMS and SMPL?
These companies operate in different sectors (SOWG (Consumer Defensive) and HIMS (Healthcare) and SMPL (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: SOWG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HIMS is a small-cap high-growth stock; SMPL is a small-cap deep-value 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.