Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
BGS vs WMT vs KR vs TGT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Grocery Stores
Discount Stores
BGS vs WMT vs KR vs TGT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Specialty Retail | Grocery Stores | Discount Stores |
| Market Cap | $433M | $1.04T | $42.03B | $57.36B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.83B | $703.06B | $147.64B | $106.25B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-43M | $22.91B | $1.02B | $4.04B |
| Gross Margin | 21.8% | 24.9% | 22.3% | 27.3% |
| Operating Margin | 5.3% | 4.1% | 1.3% | 5.3% |
| Forward P/E | 9.6x | 44.7x | 12.7x | 15.7x |
| Total Debt | $2.00B | $67.09B | $24.68B | $5.59B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $56M | $10.73B | $3.33B | $5.49B |
BGS vs WMT vs KR vs TGT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| B&G Foods, Inc. (BGS) | 100 | 23.3 | -76.7% |
| Walmart Inc. (WMT) | 100 | 314.9 | +214.9% |
| The Kroger Co. (KR) | 100 | 203.6 | +103.6% |
| Target Corporation (TGT) | 100 | 102.9 | +2.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BGS vs WMT vs KR vs TGT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BGS is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (9.6x vs 15.7x)
WMT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 37 yrs, beta 0.12, yield 0.7%
- Rev growth 4.7%, EPS growth 13.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.3%
- 499.5% 10Y total return vs KR's 108.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.12, Low D/E 67.2%, current ratio 0.79x
KR lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
TGT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive is your priority.
- Beta 0.95, yield 3.6%, current ratio 0.94x
- 3.8% margin vs BGS's -2.4%
- 3.6% yield, 22-year raise streak, vs WMT's 0.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +36.6% vs KR's -6.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 4.7% revenue growth vs BGS's -5.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.6x vs 15.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.8% margin vs BGS's -2.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.12 vs TGT's 0.95 | |
| Dividends | 3.6% yield, 22-year raise streak, vs WMT's 0.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +36.6% vs KR's -6.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.9% ROA vs BGS's -1.5%, ROIC 14.7% vs 2.9% |
BGS vs WMT vs KR vs TGT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BGS vs WMT vs KR vs TGT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BGS leads in 2 of 6 categories
TGT leads 1 • WMT leads 1 • KR leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BGS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WMT is the larger business by revenue, generating $703.1B annually — 384.5x BGS's $1.8B. TGT is the more profitable business, keeping 3.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BGS's -2.4%. On growth, WMT holds the edge at +5.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.8B | $703.1B | $147.6B | $106.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $157M | $42.8B | $5.5B | $8.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$43M | $22.9B | $1.0B | $4.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $79M | $15.3B | $3.5B | $2.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.8% | +24.9% | +22.3% | +27.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +5.3% | +4.1% | +1.3% | +5.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.4% | +3.3% | +0.7% | +3.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.3% | +2.2% | +2.4% | +2.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.2% | +5.8% | +1.2% | +3.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +93.2% | +35.1% | +50.0% | +23.7% |
Valuation Metrics
BGS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.5x trailing earnings, TGT trades at a 68% valuation discount to WMT's 47.7x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, TGT's 7.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than WMT's 24.8x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $433M | $1.04T | $42.0B | $57.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.4B | $1.09T | $63.4B | $57.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -10.04x | 47.69x | 43.12x | 15.49x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.64x | 44.71x | 12.68x | 15.74x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.33x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 24.48x | 24.85x | 10.91x | 7.26x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.24x | 1.46x | 0.28x | 0.55x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.95x | 10.45x | 7.33x | 3.55x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.13x | 24.97x | 12.55x | 20.23x |
Profitability & Efficiency
TGT leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TGT delivers a 26.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $26 in annual profit, vs $-9 for BGS. TGT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.35x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BGS's 4.42x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), WMT scores 6/9 vs BGS's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -8.9% | +22.3% | +13.0% | +26.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.5% | +7.9% | +2.0% | +6.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.9% | +14.7% | +5.0% | +16.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.6% | +17.5% | +5.5% | +13.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 4.42x | 0.67x | 4.16x | 0.35x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.9B | $56.4B | $21.3B | $104M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $56M | $10.7B | $3.3B | $5.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.0B | $67.1B | $24.7B | $5.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.67x | 11.85x | 2.59x | 12.40x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WMT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in WMT five years ago would be worth $28,695 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,724 for BGS. Over the past 12 months, TGT leads with a +36.6% total return vs KR's -6.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WMT at 37.6% vs BGS's -20.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +33.6% | +15.7% | +6.0% | +26.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +30.9% | +32.7% | -6.4% | +36.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -49.8% | +160.5% | +42.7% | -11.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -62.8% | +186.9% | +90.7% | -31.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -53.5% | +499.5% | +108.7% | +99.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -20.5% | +37.6% | +12.6% | -3.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — WMT and KR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KR is the less volatile stock with a -0.64 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TGT's 0.95 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WMT currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs BGS's 85.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.40x | 0.12x | -0.64x | 0.95x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.38 | $134.69 | $76.58 | $133.07 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.67 | $91.89 | $58.60 | $83.44 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.0% | +96.7% | +86.7% | +94.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.5 | 55.9 | 39.2 | 61.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.0M | 17.2M | 5.6M | 4.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — WMT and TGT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BGS as "Hold", WMT as "Buy", KR as "Buy", TGT as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 12.6% upside for KR (target: $75) vs -8.4% for TGT (target: $115). For income investors, TGT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.58% vs WMT's 0.72%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $5.50 | $137.04 | $74.75 | $115.31 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 17 | 64 | 44 | 59 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.7% | +2.0% | +3.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 37 | 21 | 22 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.94 | $1.35 | $4.51 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.8% | +6.4% | +0.7% |
BGS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). TGT leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
BGS vs WMT vs KR vs TGT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BGS or WMT or KR or TGT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Walmart Inc.
(WMT) is the stronger pick with 4. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 4% for B&G Foods, Inc. (BGS). Target Corporation (TGT) offers the better valuation at 15. 5x trailing P/E (15. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Walmart Inc. (WMT) a "Buy" — based on 64 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 — BGS or WMT or KR or TGT?
On trailing P/E, Target Corporation (TGT) is the cheapest at 15.
5x versus Walmart Inc. at 47. 7x. On forward P/E, B&G Foods, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BGS or WMT or KR or TGT?
Over the past 5 years, Walmart Inc.
(WMT) delivered a total return of +186. 9%, compared to -62. 8% for B&G Foods, Inc. (BGS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WMT returned +499. 5% versus BGS's -53. 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 — BGS or WMT or KR or TGT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Kroger Co.
(KR) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 64β versus Target Corporation's 0. 95β — meaning TGT is approximately -249% more volatile than KR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Target Corporation (TGT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 35% versus 4% for B&G Foods, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BGS or WMT or KR or TGT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Walmart Inc.
(WMT) is pulling ahead at 4. 7% versus -5. 4% for B&G Foods, Inc. (BGS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: B&G Foods, Inc. grew EPS 83. 0% year-over-year, compared to -58. 0% for The Kroger Co.. Over a 3-year CAGR, WMT leads at 5. 3% 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 — BGS or WMT or KR or TGT?
Target Corporation (TGT) is the more profitable company, earning 3.
5% net margin versus -2. 4% for B&G Foods, Inc. — meaning it keeps 3. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BGS leads at 5. 3% versus 1. 3% for KR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TGT leads at 27. 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.
07Is BGS or WMT or KR or TGT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, B&G Foods, Inc.
(BGS) trades at 9. 6x forward P/E versus 44. 7x for Walmart Inc. — 35. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KR: 12. 6% to $74. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — BGS or WMT or KR or TGT?
In this comparison, TGT (3.
6% yield), KR (2. 0% yield), WMT (0. 7% yield) pay a dividend. BGS does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BGS or WMT or KR or TGT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Kroger Co.
(KR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 64), 2. 0% yield, +108. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KR: +108. 7%, BGS: -53. 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 BGS and WMT and KR and TGT?
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: BGS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; WMT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; KR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; TGT is a mid-cap deep-value stock. WMT, KR, TGT pay a dividend while BGS does 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.