Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ABVE vs VITL vs FRPT vs SMPL vs NOMD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Agricultural Farm Products
Packaged Foods
Packaged Foods
Packaged Foods
ABVE vs VITL vs FRPT vs SMPL vs NOMD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Agricultural Farm Products | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods |
| Market Cap | $6M | $426M | $2.74B | $1.24B | $1.44B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $95M | $784M | $1.14B | $1.45B | $3.03B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-23M | $48M | $200M | $91M | $137M |
| Gross Margin | -4.5% | 35.2% | 38.9% | 34.0% | 27.1% |
| Operating Margin | -21.2% | 8.2% | 8.8% | 14.4% | 10.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | 10.4x | 41.1x | 7.5x | 6.9x |
| Total Debt | $118M | $53M | $560M | $304M | $2.29B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $952K | $49M | $278M | $98M | $325M |
ABVE vs VITL vs FRPT vs SMPL vs NOMD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Above Food Ingredie… (ABVE) | 100 | 5.3 | -94.7% |
| Vital Farms, Inc. (VITL) | 100 | 20.4 | -79.6% |
| Freshpet, Inc. (FRPT) | 100 | 43.2 | -56.8% |
| The Simply Good Foo… (SMPL) | 100 | 34.4 | -65.6% |
| Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD) | 100 | 61.4 | -38.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ABVE vs VITL vs FRPT vs SMPL vs NOMD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ABVE is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- -26.3% vs VITL's -73.5%
VITL has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 25.3%, EPS growth 22.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 28.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.31, Low D/E 15.2%, current ratio 2.16x
- PEG 0.26 vs SMPL's 0.31
- 25.3% revenue growth vs ABVE's -7.1%
FRPT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 17.6% margin vs ABVE's -24.6%
- 11.4% ROA vs ABVE's -67.1%, ROIC 5.3% vs -29.7%
Among these 5 stocks, SMPL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
NOMD ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.07, yield 7.1%
- 40.1% 10Y total return vs FRPT's 5.2%
- Beta 0.07, yield 7.1%, current ratio 1.07x
- Beta 0.07 vs ABVE's 4.25
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 25.3% revenue growth vs ABVE's -7.1% | |
| Value | PEG 0.26 vs 0.31 | |
| Quality / Margins | 17.6% margin vs ABVE's -24.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.07 vs ABVE's 4.25 | |
| Dividends | 7.1% yield; 2-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | -26.3% vs VITL's -73.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.4% ROA vs ABVE's -67.1%, ROIC 5.3% vs -29.7% |
ABVE vs VITL vs FRPT vs SMPL vs NOMD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
ABVE vs VITL vs FRPT vs SMPL vs NOMD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FRPT leads in 2 of 6 categories
ABVE leads 1 • VITL leads 1 • SMPL leads 0 • NOMD leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FRPT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NOMD is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.0B annually — 32.0x ABVE's $95M. FRPT is the more profitable business, keeping 17.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ABVE's -24.6%. On growth, VITL holds the edge at +15.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $95M | $784M | $1.1B | $1.4B | $3.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$19M | $78M | $165M | $231M | $435M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$23M | $48M | $200M | $91M | $137M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2M | -$90M | $223M | $174M | $252M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -4.5% | +35.2% | +38.9% | +34.0% | +27.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -21.2% | +8.2% | +8.8% | +14.4% | +10.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -24.6% | +6.1% | +17.6% | +6.3% | +4.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.6% | -11.4% | +19.6% | +12.0% | +8.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +15.4% | +13.1% | -0.3% | -2.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +97.5% | -108.1% | +4.5% | -31.6% | -123.1% |
Valuation Metrics
ABVE leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.6x trailing earnings, VITL trades at a 69% valuation discount to FRPT's 21.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), VITL offers better value at 0.17x vs SMPL's 0.51x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6M | $426M | $2.7B | $1.2B | $1.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $91M | $431M | $3.0B | $1.4B | $3.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.15x | 6.61x | 21.16x | 12.20x | 9.46x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 10.38x | 41.11x | 7.45x | 6.86x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.17x | — | 0.51x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 4.22x | 16.62x | 5.97x | 7.34x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.02x | 0.56x | 2.49x | 0.86x | 0.40x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 1.25x | 2.59x | 0.70x | 0.52x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 2.24x | — | 221.45x | 7.86x | 4.85x |
Profitability & Efficiency
VITL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FRPT delivers a 17.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $-81 for ABVE. VITL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.15x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NOMD's 0.92x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FRPT scores 6/9 vs VITL's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -80.9% | +14.5% | +17.0% | +5.2% | +5.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -67.1% | +10.0% | +11.4% | +3.7% | +2.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -29.7% | +26.9% | +5.3% | +8.1% | +5.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -4.4% | +26.1% | +6.0% | +9.4% | +6.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.15x | 0.46x | 0.17x | 0.92x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $117M | $5M | $282M | $206M | $2.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $952,280 | $49M | $278M | $98M | $325M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $118M | $53M | $560M | $304M | $2.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -7.66x | 39.83x | 13.29x | 6.77x | 2.52x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FRPT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in VITL five years ago would be worth $4,564 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $703 for ABVE. Over the past 12 months, ABVE leads with a -26.3% total return vs VITL's -73.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FRPT at -6.2% vs ABVE's -58.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -63.5% | -68.1% | -7.1% | -36.4% | -15.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -26.3% | -73.5% | -31.1% | -64.8% | -43.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.0% | -38.2% | -17.4% | -67.8% | -40.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.0% | -54.4% | -68.4% | -64.3% | -59.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.0% | -73.0% | +517.3% | +3.7% | +40.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -58.7% | -14.8% | -6.2% | -31.5% | -15.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FRPT and NOMD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NOMD is the less volatile stock with a 0.07 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ABVE's 4.25 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FRPT currently trades 62.2% from its 52-week high vs ABVE's 10.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 4.25x | 0.31x | 0.91x | 0.38x | 0.07x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.56 | $53.13 | $89.80 | $36.92 | $19.71 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.32 | $8.40 | $46.76 | $10.21 | $9.17 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +10.2% | +17.9% | +62.2% | +33.7% | +51.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.1 | 38.9 | 29.1 | 42.9 | 58.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.2M | 3.3M | 1.5M | 2.8M | 1.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: VITL as "Buy", FRPT as "Buy", SMPL as "Buy", NOMD as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 316.3% upside for VITL (target: $40) vs 31.4% for FRPT (target: $73). NOMD is the only dividend payer here at 7.06% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $39.63 | $73.42 | $20.17 | $13.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 15 | 29 | 24 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +7.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $0.61 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.1% | +16.5% |
FRPT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). ABVE leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
ABVE vs VITL vs FRPT vs SMPL vs NOMD: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ABVE or VITL or FRPT or SMPL or NOMD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Vital Farms, Inc.
(VITL) is the stronger pick with 25. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 1% for Above Food Ingredients Inc. Common Stock (ABVE). Vital Farms, Inc. (VITL) offers the better valuation at 6. 6x trailing P/E (10. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Vital Farms, Inc. (VITL) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — ABVE or VITL or FRPT or SMPL or NOMD?
On trailing P/E, Vital Farms, Inc.
(VITL) is the cheapest at 6. 6x versus Freshpet, Inc. at 21. 2x. On forward P/E, Nomad Foods Limited is actually cheaper at 6. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Vital Farms, Inc. wins at 0. 26x versus The Simply Good Foods Company's 0. 31x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ABVE or VITL or FRPT or SMPL or NOMD?
Over the past 5 years, Vital Farms, Inc.
(VITL) delivered a total return of -54. 4%, compared to -93. 0% for Above Food Ingredients Inc. Common Stock (ABVE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FRPT returned +517. 3% versus ABVE's -93. 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 — ABVE or VITL or FRPT or SMPL or NOMD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
07β versus Above Food Ingredients Inc. Common Stock's 4. 25β — meaning ABVE is approximately 5858% more volatile than NOMD relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Vital Farms, Inc. (VITL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 15% versus 92% for Nomad Foods Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ABVE or VITL or FRPT or SMPL or NOMD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Vital Farms, Inc.
(VITL) is pulling ahead at 25. 3% versus -7. 1% for Above Food Ingredients Inc. Common Stock (ABVE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Freshpet, Inc. grew EPS 183. 9% year-over-year, compared to -252. 8% for Above Food Ingredients Inc. Common Stock. Over a 3-year CAGR, VITL leads at 28. 0% 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 — ABVE or VITL or FRPT or SMPL or NOMD?
Freshpet, Inc.
(FRPT) is the more profitable company, earning 12. 6% net margin versus -14. 5% for Above Food Ingredients Inc. Common Stock — meaning it keeps 12. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SMPL leads at 15. 1% versus -11. 4% for ABVE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FRPT leads at 38. 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 ABVE or VITL or FRPT or SMPL or NOMD 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, Vital Farms, Inc. (VITL) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 26x versus The Simply Good Foods Company's 0. 31x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD) trades at 6. 9x forward P/E versus 41. 1x for Freshpet, Inc. — 34. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for VITL: 316. 3% to $39. 63.
08Which pays a better dividend — ABVE or VITL or FRPT or SMPL or NOMD?
In this comparison, NOMD (7.
1% yield) pays a dividend. ABVE, VITL, FRPT, SMPL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ABVE or VITL or FRPT or SMPL or NOMD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
07), 7. 1% yield). Above Food Ingredients Inc. Common Stock (ABVE) carries a higher beta of 4. 25 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NOMD: +40. 1%, ABVE: -93. 0%), 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 ABVE and VITL and FRPT and SMPL and NOMD?
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: ABVE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; VITL is a small-cap high-growth stock; FRPT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SMPL is a small-cap deep-value stock; NOMD is a small-cap deep-value stock. NOMD pays a dividend while ABVE, VITL, FRPT, 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.