Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
LSF vs MGPI vs CELH vs SAM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Beverages - Wineries & Distilleries
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Alcoholic
LSF vs MGPI vs CELH vs SAM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Beverages - Wineries & Distilleries | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $34M | $408M | $8.80B | $2.18B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $38M | $521M | $2.97B | $2.09B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-2M | $-240M | $149M | $-61M |
| Gross Margin | 49.2% | 36.4% | 49.6% | 45.2% |
| Operating Margin | -9.9% | -51.2% | 10.4% | -3.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 12.3x | 19.9x | 20.8x |
| Total Debt | $246K | $267M | $670M | $38M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8M | $18M | $399M | $223M |
LSF vs MGPI vs CELH vs SAM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Laird Superfood, In… (LSF) | 100 | 6.5 | -93.5% |
| MGP Ingredients, In… (MGPI) | 100 | 49.6 | -50.4% |
| Celsius Holdings, I… (CELH) | 100 | 426.6 | +326.6% |
| The Boston Beer Com… (SAM) | 100 | 22.3 | -77.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LSF vs MGPI vs CELH vs SAM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LSF is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.27, Low D/E 1.9%, current ratio 3.03x
MGPI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.63, yield 2.5%
- Beta 0.63, yield 2.5%, current ratio 2.61x
- Lower P/E (12.3x vs 20.8x)
- 2.5% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs CELH's 0.5%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
CELH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 85.5%, EPS growth -44.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 56.7%
- 41.3% 10Y total return vs SAM's 32.0%
- 85.5% revenue growth vs MGPI's -23.8%
- 5.0% margin vs MGPI's -46.0%
SAM is the clearest fit if your priority is stability.
- Beta 0.29 vs CELH's 1.29, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 85.5% revenue growth vs MGPI's -23.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.3x vs 20.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 5.0% margin vs MGPI's -46.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.29 vs CELH's 1.29, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs CELH's 0.5%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | -4.3% vs LSF's -53.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 3.1% ROA vs MGPI's -19.1%, ROIC 19.7% vs -6.7% |
LSF vs MGPI vs CELH vs SAM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LSF vs MGPI vs CELH vs SAM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CELH leads in 2 of 6 categories
MGPI leads 2 • SAM leads 1 • LSF leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CELH leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CELH is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.0B annually — 77.6x LSF's $38M. CELH is the more profitable business, keeping 5.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MGPI's -46.0%. On growth, CELH holds the edge at +137.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $38M | $521M | $3.0B | $2.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$4M | -$249M | $336M | $14M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$2M | -$240M | $149M | -$61M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$3M | $54M | $293M | $191M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +49.2% | +36.4% | +49.6% | +45.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -9.9% | -51.2% | +10.4% | -3.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.9% | -46.0% | +5.0% | -2.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.6% | +10.4% | +9.9% | +9.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -74.5% | -12.5% | +137.7% | +1.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.6% | -44.0% | +120.0% | -7.4% |
Valuation Metrics
MGPI leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 20.5x trailing earnings, SAM trades at a 85% valuation discount to CELH's 137.0x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, SAM's 8.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than CELH's 18.2x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $34M | $408M | $8.8B | $2.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $26M | $656M | $9.1B | $2.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -17.50x | -3.83x | 137.04x | 20.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 12.31x | 19.94x | 20.77x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.93x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 18.22x | 8.45x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.78x | 0.76x | 3.50x | 1.04x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.37x | 0.57x | 2.76x | 2.54x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 39.99x | 5.37x | 27.22x | 10.09x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CELH leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CELH delivers a 6.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-32 for MGPI. LSF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MGPI's 0.37x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SAM scores 7/9 vs MGPI's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -14.8% | -32.1% | +6.4% | -7.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -10.0% | -19.1% | +3.1% | -5.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -28.8% | -6.7% | +19.7% | +15.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.1% | -8.1% | +17.2% | +14.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.37x | 0.23x | 0.04x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$8M | $248M | $271M | -$186M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8M | $18M | $399M | $223M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $246,430 | $267M | $670M | $38M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -40.23x | 2.92x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — LSF and CELH each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CELH five years ago would be worth $20,941 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $889 for LSF. Over the past 12 months, CELH leads with a -4.3% total return vs LSF's -53.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LSF at 52.4% vs MGPI's -41.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +41.3% | -20.3% | -28.3% | +1.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -53.1% | -38.0% | -4.3% | -15.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +253.9% | -79.8% | -3.8% | -35.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.1% | -66.0% | +109.4% | -81.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.3% | -17.3% | +4129.6% | +32.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +52.4% | -41.3% | -1.3% | -13.4% |
Risk & Volatility
SAM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SAM is the less volatile stock with a 0.29 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CELH's 1.29 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SAM currently trades 76.7% from its 52-week high vs LSF's 39.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.26x | 0.61x | 1.28x | 0.31x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $7.94 | $34.99 | $66.74 | $264.46 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.96 | $16.45 | $31.80 | $185.34 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +39.7% | +54.6% | +51.3% | +76.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.8 | 47.6 | 39.1 | 28.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 47K | 279K | 7.3M | 199K |
Analyst Outlook
MGPI leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MGPI as "Buy", CELH as "Buy", SAM as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 61.7% upside for CELH (target: $55) vs 18.3% for SAM (target: $240). For income investors, MGPI offers the higher dividend yield at 2.53% vs CELH's 0.46%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $29.00 | $55.40 | $239.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 14 | 22 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.5% | +0.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.48 | $0.16 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.2% | +0.3% | +0.5% | +9.4% |
CELH leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MGPI leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
LSF vs MGPI vs CELH vs SAM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LSF or MGPI or CELH or SAM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) is the stronger pick with 85. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -23. 8% for MGP Ingredients, Inc. (MGPI). The Boston Beer Company, Inc. (SAM) offers the better valuation at 20. 5x trailing P/E (20. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MGP Ingredients, Inc. (MGPI) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — LSF or MGPI or CELH or SAM?
On trailing P/E, The Boston Beer Company, Inc.
(SAM) is the cheapest at 20. 5x versus Celsius Holdings, Inc. at 137. 0x. On forward P/E, MGP Ingredients, Inc. is actually cheaper at 12. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LSF or MGPI or CELH or SAM?
Over the past 5 years, Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) delivered a total return of +109. 4%, compared to -91. 1% for Laird Superfood, Inc. (LSF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CELH returned +38. 9% versus LSF's -92. 7%. 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 — LSF or MGPI or CELH or SAM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Boston Beer Company, Inc.
(SAM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 31β versus Celsius Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 28β — meaning CELH is approximately 309% more volatile than SAM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Laird Superfood, Inc. (LSF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 37% for MGP Ingredients, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LSF or MGPI or CELH or SAM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) is pulling ahead at 85. 5% versus -23. 8% for MGP Ingredients, Inc. (MGPI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Boston Beer Company, Inc. grew EPS 95. 5% year-over-year, compared to -419. 9% for MGP Ingredients, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CELH leads at 56. 7% 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 — LSF or MGPI or CELH or SAM?
The Boston Beer Company, Inc.
(SAM) is the more profitable company, earning 5. 2% net margin versus -20. 1% for MGP Ingredients, Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CELH leads at 18. 6% versus -17. 6% for MGPI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CELH leads at 50. 4%, 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 LSF or MGPI or CELH or SAM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, MGP Ingredients, Inc.
(MGPI) trades at 12. 3x forward P/E versus 20. 8x for The Boston Beer Company, Inc. — 8. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CELH: 61. 7% to $55. 40.
08Which pays a better dividend — LSF or MGPI or CELH or SAM?
In this comparison, MGPI (2.
5% yield), CELH (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. LSF, SAM do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LSF or MGPI or CELH or SAM 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. 61), 2. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MGPI: -15. 2%, LSF: -92. 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.
10What are the main differences between LSF and MGPI and CELH and SAM?
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: LSF is a small-cap high-growth stock; MGPI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CELH is a small-cap high-growth stock; SAM is a small-cap quality compounder stock. MGPI pays a dividend while LSF, CELH, SAM 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.