Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
CENT vs FRPT vs PETS vs WOOF
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Packaged Foods
Medical - Pharmaceuticals
Specialty Retail
CENT vs FRPT vs PETS vs WOOF — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods | Medical - Pharmaceuticals | Specialty Retail |
| Market Cap | $2.40B | $2.74B | $48M | $752M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.16B | $1.14B | $195M | $5.96B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $171M | $200M | $-55M | $9M |
| Gross Margin | 32.2% | 38.9% | 29.9% | 38.7% |
| Operating Margin | 8.2% | 8.8% | -11.1% | 2.0% |
| Forward P/E | 13.5x | 41.1x | — | 18.8x |
| Total Debt | $1.44B | $560M | $996K | $1.37B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $882M | $278M | $55M | $257M |
CENT vs FRPT vs PETS vs WOOF — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Central Garden & Pe… (CENT) | 100 | 116.3 | +16.3% |
| Freshpet, Inc. (FRPT) | 100 | 40.1 | -59.9% |
| PetMed Express, Inc. (PETS) | 100 | 6.0 | -94.0% |
| Petco Health and We… (WOOF) | 100 | 10.6 | -89.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CENT vs FRPT vs PETS vs WOOF
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CENT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.65
- Lower volatility, beta 0.65, Low D/E 90.9%, current ratio 3.67x
- Beta 0.65, current ratio 3.67x
- Better valuation composite
FRPT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 13.0%, EPS growth 183.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 22.8%
- 5.2% 10Y total return vs CENT's 161.6%
- 13.0% revenue growth vs PETS's -17.2%
- 17.6% margin vs PETS's -28.2%
PETS is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 0.4% yield; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend
WOOF lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 13.0% revenue growth vs PETS's -17.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 17.6% margin vs PETS's -28.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.65 vs PETS's 1.25 | |
| Dividends | 0.4% yield; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +11.8% vs PETS's -36.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.4% ROA vs PETS's -54.9%, ROIC 5.3% vs -3.1% |
CENT vs FRPT vs PETS vs WOOF — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CENT vs FRPT vs PETS vs WOOF — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CENT leads in 4 of 6 categories
FRPT leads 1 • PETS leads 1 • WOOF leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FRPT leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WOOF is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.0B annually — 30.6x PETS's $195M. FRPT is the more profitable business, keeping 17.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PETS's -28.2%. On growth, FRPT holds the edge at +13.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.2B | $1.1B | $195M | $6.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $302M | $165M | -$14M | $317M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $171M | $200M | -$55M | $9M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $282M | $223M | -$34M | $286M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +32.2% | +38.9% | +29.9% | +38.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +8.2% | +8.8% | -11.1% | +2.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.4% | +17.6% | -28.2% | +0.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.9% | +19.6% | -17.4% | +4.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.7% | +13.1% | -25.5% | -2.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +30.6% | +4.5% | -4.7% | +81.6% |
Valuation Metrics
PETS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.1x trailing earnings, CENT trades at a 83% valuation discount to WOOF's 86.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, WOOF's 5.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than FRPT's 16.6x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.4B | $2.7B | $48M | $752M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.0B | $3.0B | -$5M | $1.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.11x | 21.16x | -7.67x | 86.75x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.55x | 41.11x | — | 18.76x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 5.04x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.45x | 16.62x | -0.98x | 5.89x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.77x | 2.49x | 0.21x | 0.13x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.55x | 2.59x | 0.56x | 0.68x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.25x | 221.45x | — | 2.39x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CENT leads this category, winning 4 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 $-128 for PETS. PETS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WOOF's 1.18x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CENT scores 8/9 vs PETS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.7% | +17.0% | -127.8% | +0.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.7% | +11.4% | -54.9% | +0.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.1% | +5.3% | -3.1% | +2.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.7% | +6.0% | -1.7% | +3.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.91x | 0.46x | 0.01x | 1.18x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $558M | $282M | -$54M | $1.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $882M | $278M | $55M | $257M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.4B | $560M | $996,000 | $1.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1200.51x | 13.29x | -73.26x | 0.95x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CENT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CENT five years ago would be worth $8,277 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,154 for WOOF. Over the past 12 months, CENT leads with a +11.8% total return vs PETS's -36.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CENT at 9.4% vs PETS's -42.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +20.6% | -7.1% | -30.3% | -3.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +11.8% | -31.1% | -36.5% | -14.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +30.9% | -17.4% | -80.5% | -73.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -17.2% | -68.4% | -82.1% | -88.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +161.6% | +517.3% | -47.8% | -90.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +9.4% | -6.2% | -42.0% | -35.4% |
Risk & Volatility
CENT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CENT is the less volatile stock with a 0.65 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PETS's 1.25 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CENT currently trades 93.3% from its 52-week high vs PETS's 53.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.65x | 0.91x | 1.25x | 0.92x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $41.30 | $89.80 | $4.32 | $4.51 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $28.77 | $46.76 | $1.57 | $2.24 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +93.3% | +62.2% | +53.2% | +61.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.2 | 29.1 | 47.7 | 42.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 74K | 1.5M | 81K | 2.6M |
Analyst Outlook
CENT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CENT as "Buy", FRPT as "Buy", WOOF as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 32.4% upside for CENT (target: $51) vs 30.5% for WOOF (target: $4). PETS is the only dividend payer here at 0.38% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | — | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $51.00 | $73.42 | — | $3.59 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 29 | — | 25 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.4% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | — | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.01 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +6.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
CENT leads in 4 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). FRPT leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow).
CENT vs FRPT vs PETS vs WOOF: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CENT or FRPT or PETS or WOOF a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Freshpet, Inc.
(FRPT) is the stronger pick with 13. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -17. 2% for PetMed Express, Inc. (PETS). Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) offers the better valuation at 15. 1x trailing P/E (13. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — CENT or FRPT or PETS or WOOF?
On trailing P/E, Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) is the cheapest at 15.
1x versus Petco Health and Wellness Company, Inc. at 86. 8x. On forward P/E, Central Garden & Pet Company is actually cheaper at 13. 5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CENT or FRPT or PETS or WOOF?
Over the past 5 years, Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) delivered a total return of -17.
2%, compared to -88. 5% for Petco Health and Wellness Company, Inc. (WOOF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FRPT returned +517. 3% versus WOOF's -90. 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 — CENT or FRPT or PETS or WOOF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
65β versus PetMed Express, Inc. 's 1. 25β — meaning PETS is approximately 92% more volatile than CENT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, PetMed Express, Inc. (PETS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 118% for Petco Health and Wellness Company, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CENT or FRPT or PETS or WOOF?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Freshpet, Inc.
(FRPT) is pulling ahead at 13. 0% versus -17. 2% for PetMed Express, Inc. (PETS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Freshpet, Inc. grew EPS 183. 9% year-over-year, compared to 18. 9% for PetMed Express, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FRPT leads at 22. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — CENT or FRPT or PETS or WOOF?
Freshpet, Inc.
(FRPT) is the more profitable company, earning 12. 6% net margin versus -2. 8% for PetMed Express, Inc. — meaning it keeps 12. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FRPT leads at 8. 6% versus -0. 7% for PETS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WOOF leads at 38. 7%, 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 CENT or FRPT or PETS or WOOF more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) trades at 13.
5x forward P/E versus 41. 1x for Freshpet, Inc. — 27. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CENT: 32. 4% to $51. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CENT or FRPT or PETS or WOOF?
In this comparison, PETS (0.
4% yield) pays a dividend. CENT, FRPT, WOOF do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CENT or FRPT or PETS or WOOF better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Freshpet, Inc.
(FRPT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 91), +517. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FRPT: +517. 3%, PETS: -47. 8%), 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 CENT and FRPT and PETS and WOOF?
These companies operate in different sectors (CENT (Consumer Defensive) and FRPT (Consumer Defensive) and PETS (Healthcare) and WOOF (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CENT is a small-cap deep-value stock; FRPT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PETS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; WOOF is a small-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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.