Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HRL vs WMT vs KR vs TGT vs COST
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Grocery Stores
Discount Stores
Discount Stores
HRL vs WMT vs KR vs TGT vs COST — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Specialty Retail | Grocery Stores | Discount Stores | Discount Stores |
| Market Cap | $11.41B | $1.04T | $42.03B | $57.36B | $448.58B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $12.14B | $703.06B | $147.64B | $106.25B | $286.26B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $489M | $22.91B | $1.02B | $4.04B | $8.55B |
| Gross Margin | 15.5% | 24.9% | 22.3% | 27.3% | 12.9% |
| Operating Margin | 6.0% | 4.1% | 1.3% | 5.3% | 3.8% |
| Forward P/E | 14.1x | 44.7x | 12.7x | 15.7x | 49.5x |
| Total Debt | $2.86B | $67.09B | $24.68B | $5.59B | $8.17B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $671M | $10.73B | $3.33B | $5.49B | $14.16B |
HRL vs WMT vs KR vs TGT vs COST — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hormel Foods Corpor… (HRL) | 100 | 42.5 | -57.5% |
| 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% |
| Costco Wholesale Co… (COST) | 100 | 328.1 | +228.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HRL vs WMT vs KR vs TGT vs COST
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HRL has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 34 yrs, beta 0.15, yield 5.5%
- Beta 0.15, yield 5.5%, current ratio 2.47x
- 4.0% margin vs KR's 0.7%
- 5.5% yield, 34-year raise streak, vs WMT's 0.7%
WMT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for stability.
- Beta 0.12 vs TGT's 0.95
KR is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (12.7x vs 15.7x)
TGT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +36.6% vs HRL's -24.7%
COST is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 8.2%, EPS growth 10.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 6.6%
- 6.2% 10Y total return vs WMT's 499.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.13, Low D/E 28.0%, current ratio 1.03x
- PEG 3.28 vs WMT's 4.06
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.2% revenue growth vs TGT's -1.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.7x vs 15.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 4.0% margin vs KR's 0.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.12 vs TGT's 0.95 | |
| Dividends | 5.5% yield, 34-year raise streak, vs WMT's 0.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +36.6% vs HRL's -24.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 10.7% ROA vs KR's 2.0%, ROIC 34.5% vs 5.0% |
HRL vs WMT vs KR vs TGT vs COST — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HRL vs WMT vs KR vs TGT vs COST — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HRL leads in 1 of 6 categories
KR leads 1 • COST leads 1 • WMT leads 1 • TGT leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HRL 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 — 57.9x HRL's $12.1B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 4.0% (HRL) to 0.7% (KR). On growth, COST holds the edge at +9.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $12.1B | $703.1B | $147.6B | $106.2B | $286.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $932M | $42.8B | $5.5B | $8.7B | $13.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $489M | $22.9B | $1.0B | $4.0B | $8.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $578M | $15.3B | $3.5B | $2.9B | $9.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +15.5% | +24.9% | +22.3% | +27.3% | +12.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.0% | +4.1% | +1.3% | +5.3% | +3.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.0% | +3.3% | +0.7% | +3.8% | +3.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.8% | +2.2% | +2.4% | +2.8% | +3.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.3% | +5.8% | +1.2% | +3.2% | +9.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.5% | +35.1% | +50.0% | +23.7% | -2.1% |
Valuation Metrics
KR leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.5x trailing earnings, TGT trades at a 72% valuation discount to COST's 55.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), COST offers better value at 3.68x vs WMT's 4.33x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $11.4B | $1.04T | $42.0B | $57.4B | $448.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $13.6B | $1.09T | $63.4B | $57.5B | $442.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 23.84x | 47.69x | 43.12x | 15.49x | 55.58x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 14.13x | 44.71x | 12.68x | 15.74x | 49.51x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.33x | — | — | 3.68x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.84x | 24.85x | 10.91x | 7.26x | 34.55x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.94x | 1.46x | 0.28x | 0.55x | 1.63x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.44x | 10.45x | 7.33x | 3.55x | 15.44x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 21.36x | 24.97x | 12.55x | 20.23x | 57.24x |
Profitability & Efficiency
COST leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
COST delivers a 28.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $29 in annual profit, vs $4 for HRL. COST carries lower financial leverage with a 0.28x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KR's 4.16x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), COST scores 7/9 vs KR's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +4.3% | +22.3% | +13.0% | +26.1% | +28.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.7% | +7.9% | +2.0% | +6.9% | +10.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.3% | +14.7% | +5.0% | +16.7% | +34.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.0% | +17.5% | +5.5% | +13.6% | +27.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.36x | 0.67x | 4.16x | 0.35x | 0.28x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.2B | $56.4B | $21.3B | $104M | -$6.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $671M | $10.7B | $3.3B | $5.5B | $14.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.9B | $67.1B | $24.7B | $5.6B | $8.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 6.44x | 11.85x | 2.59x | 12.40x | 77.52x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WMT leads this category, winning 3 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 $5,569 for HRL. Over the past 12 months, TGT leads with a +36.6% total return vs HRL's -24.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WMT at 37.6% vs HRL's -15.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -8.8% | +15.7% | +6.0% | +26.4% | +18.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -24.7% | +32.7% | -6.4% | +36.6% | +1.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -40.5% | +160.5% | +42.7% | -11.0% | +108.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -44.3% | +186.9% | +90.7% | -31.6% | +172.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -23.9% | +499.5% | +108.7% | +99.5% | +625.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -15.9% | +37.6% | +12.6% | -3.8% | +27.8% |
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 HRL's 65.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.15x | 0.12x | -0.64x | 0.95x | 0.13x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $31.86 | $134.69 | $76.58 | $133.07 | $1067.08 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $20.32 | $91.89 | $58.60 | $83.44 | $846.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +65.1% | +96.7% | +86.7% | +94.6% | +94.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 39.5 | 55.9 | 39.2 | 61.4 | 47.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.2M | 17.2M | 5.6M | 4.5M | 1.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — HRL and WMT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HRL as "Hold", WMT as "Buy", KR as "Buy", TGT as "Hold", COST as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 31.4% upside for HRL (target: $27) vs -8.4% for TGT (target: $115). For income investors, HRL offers the higher dividend yield at 5.54% vs COST's 0.48%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $27.25 | $137.04 | $74.75 | $115.31 | $1070.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 29 | 64 | 44 | 59 | 58 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +5.5% | +0.7% | +2.0% | +3.6% | +0.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 34 | 37 | 21 | 22 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.15 | $0.94 | $1.35 | $4.51 | $4.91 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.8% | +6.4% | +0.7% | +0.2% |
HRL leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). KR leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
HRL vs WMT vs KR vs TGT vs COST: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HRL or WMT or KR or TGT or COST a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is the stronger pick with 8.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 7% for Target Corporation (TGT). 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 — HRL or WMT or KR or TGT or COST?
On trailing P/E, Target Corporation (TGT) is the cheapest at 15.
5x versus Costco Wholesale Corporation at 55. 6x. On forward P/E, The Kroger Co. is actually cheaper at 12. 7x — 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: Costco Wholesale Corporation wins at 3. 28x versus Walmart Inc. 's 4. 06x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HRL or WMT or KR or TGT or COST?
Over the past 5 years, Walmart Inc.
(WMT) delivered a total return of +186. 9%, compared to -44. 3% for Hormel Foods Corporation (HRL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: COST returned +625. 0% versus HRL's -23. 9%. 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 — HRL or WMT or KR or TGT or COST?
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, Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 28% versus 4% for The Kroger Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HRL or WMT or KR or TGT or COST?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is pulling ahead at 8.
2% versus -1. 7% for Target Corporation (TGT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Walmart Inc. grew EPS 13. 3% year-over-year, compared to -58. 0% for The Kroger Co.. Over a 3-year CAGR, COST leads at 6. 6% 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 — HRL or WMT or KR or TGT or COST?
Hormel Foods Corporation (HRL) is the more profitable company, earning 4.
0% net margin versus 0. 7% for The Kroger Co. — meaning it keeps 4. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HRL leads at 5. 9% 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 HRL or WMT or KR or TGT or COST 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, Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 3. 28x versus Walmart Inc. 's 4. 06x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, The Kroger Co. (KR) trades at 12. 7x forward P/E versus 49. 5x for Costco Wholesale Corporation — 36. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HRL: 31. 4% to $27. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — HRL or WMT or KR or TGT or COST?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Hormel Foods Corporation (HRL) offers the highest yield at 5. 5%, versus 0. 5% for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST).
09Is HRL or WMT or KR or TGT or COST 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%, TGT: +99. 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 HRL and WMT and KR and TGT and COST?
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: HRL is a mid-cap income-oriented 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; COST is a large-cap quality compounder stock. HRL, WMT, KR, TGT pay a dividend while COST 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.