Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
COOT vs FLXS vs VITL vs APOG vs MGPI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
Agricultural Farm Products
Construction
Beverages - Wineries & Distilleries
COOT vs FLXS vs VITL vs APOG vs MGPI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances | Agricultural Farm Products | Construction | Beverages - Wineries & Distilleries |
| Market Cap | $18M | $295M | $426M | $787M | $408M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $38M | $458M | $784M | $1.40B | $521M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-25M | $22M | $48M | $54M | $-240M |
| Gross Margin | 9.5% | 23.2% | 35.2% | 22.7% | 36.4% |
| Operating Margin | -2.3% | 6.1% | 8.2% | 6.7% | -51.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 11.9x | 10.4x | 10.6x | 12.1x |
| Total Debt | $18M | $59M | $53M | $286M | $267M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $514K | $40M | $49M | $40M | $18M |
COOT vs FLXS vs VITL vs APOG vs MGPI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Australian Oilseeds… (COOT) | 100 | 39.2 | -60.8% |
| Flexsteel Industrie… (FLXS) | 100 | 147.9 | +47.9% |
| Vital Farms, Inc. (VITL) | 100 | 40.9 | -59.1% |
| Apogee Enterprises,… (APOG) | 100 | 61.8 | -38.2% |
| MGP Ingredients, In… (MGPI) | 100 | 22.2 | -77.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: COOT vs FLXS vs VITL vs APOG vs MGPI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
COOT lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
FLXS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 51.4% 10Y total return vs APOG's 10.5%
- +80.1% vs VITL's -73.5%
VITL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for 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 APOG's 0.32
- 25.3% revenue growth vs MGPI's -23.8%
APOG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 1.25, yield 2.8%
- 2.8% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs FLXS's 1.1%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
MGPI is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 0.63, yield 2.5%, current ratio 2.61x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 25.3% revenue growth vs MGPI's -23.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.4x vs 10.6x), PEG 0.26 vs 0.32 | |
| Quality / Margins | 6.1% margin vs COOT's -66.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.31 vs FLXS's 1.51, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.8% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs FLXS's 1.1%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +80.1% vs VITL's -73.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 10.0% ROA vs COOT's -80.4%, ROIC 26.9% vs 10.0% |
COOT vs FLXS vs VITL vs APOG vs MGPI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
COOT vs FLXS vs VITL vs APOG vs MGPI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
VITL leads in 2 of 6 categories
FLXS leads 1 • APOG leads 1 • COOT leads 0 • MGPI leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
VITL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
APOG is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.4B annually — 37.1x COOT's $38M. VITL is the more profitable business, keeping 6.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to COOT's -66.0%. On growth, VITL holds the edge at +15.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $38M | $458M | $784M | $1.4B | $521M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$492,185 | $31M | $78M | $57M | -$249M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$25M | $22M | $48M | $54M | -$240M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$10M | $28M | -$90M | $95M | $54M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +9.5% | +23.2% | +35.2% | +22.7% | +36.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.3% | +6.1% | +8.2% | +6.7% | -51.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -66.0% | +4.8% | +6.1% | +3.9% | -46.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -27.0% | +6.1% | -11.4% | +6.8% | +10.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +9.8% | +15.4% | +1.6% | -12.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -27.2% | -108.1% | +6.1% | -44.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — VITL and MGPI each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.6x trailing earnings, VITL trades at a 57% valuation discount to FLXS's 15.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), VITL offers better value at 0.17x vs APOG's 0.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $18M | $295M | $426M | $787M | $408M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $31M | $314M | $431M | $1.0B | $656M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.23x | 15.54x | 6.61x | 14.52x | -3.83x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 11.90x | 10.38x | 10.64x | 12.10x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.17x | 0.43x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 18.83x | 10.38x | 4.22x | 21.95x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.11x | 0.67x | 0.56x | 0.56x | 0.76x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 19.66x | 1.87x | 1.25x | 1.53x | 0.57x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 8.74x | — | 8.27x | 5.37x |
Profitability & Efficiency
VITL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
VITL delivers a 14.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $-5 for COOT. VITL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.15x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to COOT's 19.90x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FLXS scores 8/9 vs VITL's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -4.8% | +12.2% | +14.5% | +10.8% | -32.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -80.4% | +7.5% | +10.0% | +4.8% | -19.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.0% | +9.9% | +26.9% | +8.1% | -6.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +19.3% | +12.3% | +26.1% | +9.7% | -8.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 19.90x | 0.35x | 0.15x | 0.56x | 0.37x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $18M | $19M | $5M | $247M | $248M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $514,140 | $40M | $49M | $40M | $18M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $18M | $59M | $53M | $286M | $267M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -16.29x | 380.21x | 39.83x | 5.97x | -40.23x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FLXS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FLXS five years ago would be worth $11,954 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $839 for COOT. Over the past 12 months, FLXS leads with a +80.1% total return vs VITL's -73.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FLXS at 50.7% vs COOT's -56.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +21.0% | +38.7% | -68.1% | -1.3% | -20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -16.6% | +80.1% | -73.5% | -2.8% | -38.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.6% | +242.4% | -38.2% | -0.1% | -79.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.6% | +19.5% | -54.4% | +12.9% | -66.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.6% | +51.4% | -73.0% | +10.5% | -17.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -56.2% | +50.7% | -14.8% | -0.0% | -41.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FLXS and VITL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
VITL is the less volatile stock with a 0.31 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FLXS's 1.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FLXS currently trades 92.0% from its 52-week high vs COOT's 14.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.80x | 1.51x | 0.31x | 1.25x | 0.63x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.50 | $59.95 | $53.13 | $49.99 | $34.99 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.41 | $29.38 | $8.40 | $30.75 | $16.45 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +14.4% | +92.0% | +17.9% | +73.2% | +54.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.1 | 60.4 | 38.9 | 53.6 | 47.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 324K | 47K | 3.3M | 253K | 279K |
Analyst Outlook
APOG leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: VITL as "Buy", APOG as "Hold", MGPI as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 316.3% upside for VITL (target: $40) vs -2.1% for FLXS (target: $54). For income investors, APOG offers the higher dividend yield at 2.83% vs FLXS's 1.14%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $54.00 | $39.63 | $70.50 | $29.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 15 | 6 | 14 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.1% | — | +2.8% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | — | 14 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.63 | — | $1.04 | $0.48 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.0% | 0.0% | +1.9% | +0.3% |
VITL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). FLXS leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
COOT vs FLXS vs VITL vs APOG vs MGPI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is COOT or FLXS or VITL or APOG or MGPI 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 -23. 8% for MGP Ingredients, Inc. (MGPI). 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 — COOT or FLXS or VITL or APOG or MGPI?
On trailing P/E, Vital Farms, Inc.
(VITL) is the cheapest at 6. 6x versus Flexsteel Industries, Inc. at 15. 5x. On forward P/E, Vital Farms, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 4x. 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 Apogee Enterprises, Inc. 's 0. 32x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — COOT or FLXS or VITL or APOG or MGPI?
Over the past 5 years, Flexsteel Industries, Inc.
(FLXS) delivered a total return of +19. 5%, compared to -91. 6% for Australian Oilseeds Holdings Limited Ordinary Shares (COOT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FLXS returned +51. 4% versus COOT's -91. 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 — COOT or FLXS or VITL or APOG or MGPI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Vital Farms, Inc.
(VITL) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 31β versus Flexsteel Industries, Inc. 's 1. 51β — meaning FLXS is approximately 383% more volatile than VITL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Vital Farms, Inc. (VITL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 15% versus 20% for Australian Oilseeds Holdings Limited Ordinary Shares — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — COOT or FLXS or VITL or APOG or MGPI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Vital Farms, Inc.
(VITL) is pulling ahead at 25. 3% versus -23. 8% for MGP Ingredients, Inc. (MGPI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Flexsteel Industries, Inc. grew EPS 85. 9% year-over-year, compared to -1525. 8% for Australian Oilseeds Holdings Limited Ordinary Shares. 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 — COOT or FLXS or VITL or APOG or MGPI?
Vital Farms, Inc.
(VITL) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 7% net margin versus -64. 2% for Australian Oilseeds Holdings Limited Ordinary Shares — meaning it keeps 8. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: VITL leads at 11. 6% versus -17. 6% for MGPI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — VITL leads at 37. 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 COOT or FLXS or VITL or APOG or MGPI 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 Apogee Enterprises, Inc. 's 0. 32x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Vital Farms, Inc. (VITL) trades at 10. 4x forward P/E versus 12. 1x for MGP Ingredients, Inc. — 1. 7x 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 — COOT or FLXS or VITL or APOG or MGPI?
In this comparison, APOG (2.
8% yield), MGPI (2. 5% yield), FLXS (1. 1% yield) pay a dividend. COOT, VITL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is COOT or FLXS or VITL or APOG or MGPI better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, MGP Ingredients, Inc.
(MGPI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 63), 2. 5% yield). Flexsteel Industries, Inc. (FLXS) carries a higher beta of 1. 51 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MGPI: -17. 3%, FLXS: +51. 4%), 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 COOT and FLXS and VITL and APOG and MGPI?
These companies operate in different sectors (COOT (Consumer Defensive) and FLXS (Consumer Cyclical) and VITL (Consumer Defensive) and APOG (Industrials) and MGPI (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: COOT is a small-cap high-growth stock; FLXS is a small-cap deep-value stock; VITL is a small-cap high-growth stock; APOG is a small-cap deep-value stock; MGPI is a small-cap quality compounder stock. FLXS, APOG, MGPI pay a dividend while COOT, VITL 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.