Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
THS vs SMPL vs JBSS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Packaged Foods
Packaged Foods
THS vs SMPL vs JBSS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods |
| Market Cap | $1.46B | $1.26B | $931M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.34B | $1.45B | $1.14B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-242M | $91M | $70M |
| Gross Margin | 17.7% | 34.0% | 19.1% |
| Operating Margin | -4.6% | 14.4% | 8.9% |
| Forward P/E | 12.8x | 7.6x | 10.9x |
| Total Debt | $1.57B | $304M | $102M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $290M | $98M | $585K |
THS vs SMPL vs JBSS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | Feb 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| TreeHouse Foods, In… (THS) | 100 | 46.3 | -53.7% |
| The Simply Good Foo… (SMPL) | 100 | 110.2 | +10.2% |
| John B. Sanfilippo … (JBSS) | 100 | 81.2 | -18.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: THS vs SMPL vs JBSS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
THS plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
SMPL is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 9.0%, EPS growth -26.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 7.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.38, Low D/E 16.8%, current ratio 3.64x
- PEG 0.32 vs JBSS's 7.73
JBSS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.31, yield 2.6%
- 107.6% 10Y total return vs SMPL's 5.3%
- Beta 0.31, yield 2.6%, current ratio 2.22x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.0% revenue growth vs THS's -2.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.6x vs 10.9x), PEG 0.32 vs 7.73 | |
| Quality / Margins | 6.3% margin vs THS's -7.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.31 vs THS's 1.18, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +39.5% vs SMPL's -65.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.7% ROA vs THS's -6.4%, ROIC 15.2% vs 2.7% |
THS vs SMPL vs JBSS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
THS vs SMPL vs JBSS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SMPL leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
THS is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.3B annually — 2.9x JBSS's $1.1B. SMPL is the more profitable business, keeping 6.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to THS's -7.2%. On growth, JBSS holds the edge at +4.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.3B | $1.4B | $1.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $11M | $231M | $127M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$242M | $91M | $70M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $101M | $174M | $33M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +17.7% | +34.0% | +19.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -4.6% | +14.4% | +8.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -7.2% | +6.3% | +6.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +3.0% | +12.0% | +2.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +0.1% | -0.3% | +4.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -74.1% | -31.6% | +31.9% |
Valuation Metrics
SMPL leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.4x trailing earnings, SMPL trades at a 74% valuation discount to THS's 47.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), SMPL offers better value at 0.52x vs JBSS's 11.23x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.5B | $1.3B | $931M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.7B | $1.5B | $1.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 47.90x | 12.38x | 15.83x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.84x | 7.57x | 10.89x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.52x | 11.23x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.95x | 6.05x | 8.89x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.44x | 0.87x | 0.84x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.83x | 0.71x | 2.59x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.59x | 7.98x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
JBSS leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JBSS delivers a 19.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $-19 for THS. SMPL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to THS's 1.01x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), THS scores 5/9 vs JBSS's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -19.2% | +5.2% | +19.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -6.4% | +3.7% | +11.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.7% | +8.1% | +15.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.1% | +9.4% | +20.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.01x | 0.17x | 0.28x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.3B | $206M | $102M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $290M | $98M | $585,000 |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.6B | $304M | $102M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -1.98x | 6.77x | 26.02x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JBSS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JBSS five years ago would be worth $10,592 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,630 for SMPL. Over the past 12 months, JBSS leads with a +39.5% total return vs SMPL's -65.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JBSS at -7.8% vs SMPL's -31.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +4.0% | -35.4% | +16.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +10.6% | -65.1% | +39.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.5% | -67.3% | -21.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -49.4% | -63.7% | +5.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -73.6% | +5.3% | +107.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -23.1% | -31.1% | -7.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — THS and JBSS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
JBSS is the less volatile stock with a 0.31 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than THS's 1.18 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. THS currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs SMPL's 34.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.18x | 0.38x | 0.31x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.85 | $36.99 | $85.15 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.85 | $10.21 | $58.47 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.3% | +34.1% | +93.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.0 | 44.4 | 51.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 28.9M | 2.8M | 79K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: THS as "Hold", SMPL as "Buy", JBSS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 59.7% upside for SMPL (target: $20) vs -5.9% for THS (target: $23). JBSS is the only dividend payer here at 2.61% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $23.00 | $20.17 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 26 | 24 | 2 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.08 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +10.2% | +4.0% | +0.1% |
SMPL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). JBSS leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
THS vs SMPL vs JBSS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is THS or SMPL or JBSS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the stronger pick with 9.
0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 3% for TreeHouse Foods, Inc. (THS). The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) offers the better valuation at 12. 4x trailing P/E (7. 6x 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 — THS or SMPL or JBSS?
On trailing P/E, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the cheapest at 12.
4x versus TreeHouse Foods, Inc. at 47. 9x. On forward P/E, The Simply Good Foods Company is actually cheaper at 7. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: The Simply Good Foods Company wins at 0. 32x versus John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. 's 7. 73x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — THS or SMPL or JBSS?
Over the past 5 years, John B.
Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. (JBSS) delivered a total return of +5. 9%, compared to -63. 7% for The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JBSS returned +107. 6% versus THS's -73. 6%. 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 — THS or SMPL or JBSS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), John B.
Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. (JBSS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 31β versus TreeHouse Foods, Inc. 's 1. 18β — meaning THS is approximately 278% more volatile than JBSS 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 101% for TreeHouse Foods, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — THS or SMPL or JBSS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is pulling ahead at 9.
0% versus -2. 3% for TreeHouse Foods, Inc. (THS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. grew EPS -2. 3% year-over-year, compared to -45. 7% for TreeHouse Foods, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SMPL leads at 7. 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 — THS or SMPL or JBSS?
The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the more profitable company, earning 7.
1% net margin versus 0. 8% for TreeHouse Foods, 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 3. 1% for THS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SMPL leads at 35. 1%, 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 THS or SMPL or JBSS 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, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 32x versus John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. 's 7. 73x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) trades at 7. 6x forward P/E versus 12. 8x for TreeHouse Foods, Inc. — 5. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SMPL: 59. 7% to $20. 17.
08Which pays a better dividend — THS or SMPL or JBSS?
In this comparison, JBSS (2.
6% yield) pays a dividend. THS, SMPL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is THS or SMPL or JBSS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, John B.
Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. (JBSS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 31), 2. 6% yield, +107. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (JBSS: +107. 6%, THS: -73. 6%), 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 THS and SMPL and JBSS?
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: THS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SMPL is a small-cap deep-value stock; JBSS is a small-cap deep-value stock. JBSS pays a dividend while THS, SMPL do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.