HLMN vs ACCO

For growth investors, Hillman Solutions Corp.

(HLMN) is the stronger pick with 5. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 5% for ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO). ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) offers the better valuation at 9. 2x trailing P/E (4. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Hillman Solutions Corp. (HLMN) a "Buy" — based on 7 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.

On trailing P/E, ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) is the cheapest at 9.

2x versus Hillman Solutions Corp. at 39. 4x. On forward P/E, ACCO Brands Corporation is actually cheaper at 4. 8x.

Over the past 5 years, Hillman Solutions Corp.

(HLMN) delivered a total return of -30. 4%, compared to -39. 3% for ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HLMN returned -19. 7% versus ACCO's -35. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

33β versus Hillman Solutions Corp. 's 1. 37β — meaning HLMN is approximately 3% more volatile than ACCO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Hillman Solutions Corp. (HLMN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 67% versus 139% for ACCO Brands Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hillman Solutions Corp.

(HLMN) is pulling ahead at 5. 4% versus -8. 5% for ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ACCO Brands Corporation grew EPS 141. 5% year-over-year, compared to 122. 2% for Hillman Solutions Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HLMN leads at 1. 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.

ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) is the more profitable company, earning 2.

7% net margin versus 2. 6% for Hillman Solutions Corp. — meaning it keeps 2. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HLMN leads at 7. 6% versus 7. 1% for ACCO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HLMN leads at 39. 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.

On forward earnings alone, ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) trades at 4.

8x forward P/E versus 13. 5x for Hillman Solutions Corp. — 8. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ACCO: 97. 0% to $8. 00.

In this comparison, ACCO (7.

1% yield) pays a dividend. HLMN does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (7.

1% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ACCO: -35. 1%, HLMN: -19. 7%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: HLMN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ACCO is a small-cap deep-value stock. ACCO pays a dividend while HLMN 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.