Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LW vs NOMD vs CAG vs HRL vs TSN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Packaged Foods
Packaged Foods
Packaged Foods
Agricultural Farm Products
LW vs NOMD vs CAG vs HRL vs TSN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods | Agricultural Farm Products |
| Market Cap | $5.83B | $1.34B | $6.76B | $11.24B | $24.34B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.53B | $3.00B | $11.18B | $12.14B | $55.71B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $450M | $133M | $13M | $489M | $453M |
| Gross Margin | 22.2% | 26.6% | 24.6% | 15.5% | 6.6% |
| Operating Margin | 11.9% | 10.6% | 13.1% | 6.0% | 2.3% |
| Forward P/E | 15.2x | 6.2x | 8.3x | 13.9x | 17.0x |
| Total Debt | $4.16B | $2.29B | $8.31B | $2.86B | $8.83B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $71M | $325M | $68M | $671M | $1.23B |
LW vs NOMD vs CAG vs HRL vs TSN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lamb Weston Holding… (LW) | 100 | 69.9 | -30.1% |
| Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD) | 100 | 44.6 | -55.4% |
| Conagra Brands, Inc. (CAG) | 100 | 40.6 | -59.4% |
| Hormel Foods Corpor… (HRL) | 100 | 41.8 | -58.2% |
| Tyson Foods, Inc. (TSN) | 100 | 111.3 | +11.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LW vs NOMD vs CAG vs HRL vs TSN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LW has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 0.8%, EPS growth 0.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 16.3%
- 52.8% 10Y total return vs TSN's 23.8%
- 6.9% margin vs CAG's 0.1%
- 6.2% ROA vs CAG's 0.1%, ROIC 8.6% vs 6.0%
NOMD is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (6.2x vs 17.0x)
CAG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 6 yrs, beta 0.07, yield 9.9%
- Beta 0.07, yield 9.9%, current ratio 0.71x
- Beta 0.07 vs LW's 0.69, lower leverage
- 9.9% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs HRL's 5.6%
HRL is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.15, Low D/E 36.1%, current ratio 2.47x
TSN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth and momentum.
- 2.1% revenue growth vs CAG's -4.8%
- +25.0% vs NOMD's -47.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 2.1% revenue growth vs CAG's -4.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.2x vs 17.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 6.9% margin vs CAG's 0.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.07 vs LW's 0.69, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 9.9% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs HRL's 5.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +25.0% vs NOMD's -47.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.2% ROA vs CAG's 0.1%, ROIC 8.6% vs 6.0% |
LW vs NOMD vs CAG vs HRL vs TSN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LW vs NOMD vs CAG vs HRL vs TSN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NOMD leads in 1 of 6 categories
LW leads 1 • TSN leads 1 • CAG leads 0 • HRL leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — LW and TSN each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TSN is the larger business by revenue, generating $55.7B annually — 18.6x NOMD's $3.0B. LW is the more profitable business, keeping 6.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CAG's 0.1%. On growth, TSN holds the edge at +4.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6.5B | $3.0B | $11.2B | $12.1B | $55.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.2B | $429M | $1.9B | $932M | $2.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $450M | $133M | $13M | $489M | $453M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $845M | $227M | $634M | $578M | $1.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +22.2% | +26.6% | +24.6% | +15.5% | +6.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.9% | +10.6% | +13.1% | +6.0% | +2.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.9% | +4.4% | +0.1% | +4.0% | +0.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.9% | +7.6% | +5.7% | +4.8% | +2.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +0.3% | -4.4% | -6.8% | +1.3% | +4.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -47.7% | 0.0% | -3.4% | +6.5% | +36.1% |
Valuation Metrics
NOMD leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 5.9x trailing earnings, CAG trades at a 88% valuation discount to TSN's 50.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CAG offers better value at 0.84x vs LW's 189.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.8B | $1.3B | $6.8B | $11.2B | $24.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $9.9B | $3.6B | $15.0B | $13.4B | $31.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 16.80x | 8.84x | 5.86x | 23.48x | 50.28x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.20x | 6.23x | 8.31x | 13.92x | 16.96x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 189.58x | — | 0.84x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.25x | 7.15x | 8.55x | 13.66x | 11.40x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.90x | 0.38x | 0.58x | 0.93x | 0.45x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.45x | 0.48x | 0.76x | 1.42x | 1.31x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 25.36x | 4.53x | 5.19x | 21.03x | 20.68x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LW leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LW delivers a 25.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $25 in annual profit, vs $0 for CAG. HRL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.36x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LW's 2.39x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CAG scores 6/9 vs NOMD's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +25.1% | +5.3% | +0.2% | +4.3% | +2.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.2% | +2.1% | +0.1% | +3.7% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.6% | +5.5% | +6.0% | +5.3% | +4.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.2% | +6.2% | +8.2% | +6.0% | +4.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.39x | 0.92x | 0.93x | 0.36x | 0.48x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.1B | $2.0B | $8.2B | $2.2B | $7.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $71M | $325M | $68M | $671M | $1.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.2B | $2.3B | $8.3B | $2.9B | $8.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.33x | 2.64x | 1.56x | 6.44x | 2.73x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TSN leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TSN five years ago would be worth $9,897 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,794 for NOMD. Over the past 12 months, TSN leads with a +25.0% total return vs NOMD's -47.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TSN at 13.6% vs LW's -25.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1.1% | -21.0% | -14.3% | -10.2% | +18.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -15.4% | -47.9% | -33.1% | -26.5% | +25.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -58.8% | -43.8% | -51.4% | -41.3% | +46.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -38.8% | -62.1% | -45.4% | -45.5% | -1.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +52.8% | +31.8% | -28.5% | -24.7% | +23.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -25.6% | -17.5% | -21.4% | -16.3% | +13.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CAG and TSN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CAG is the less volatile stock with a 0.07 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LW's 0.69 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TSN currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs NOMD's 48.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.69x | 0.08x | 0.07x | 0.15x | 0.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $67.07 | $19.60 | $23.47 | $31.86 | $69.48 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $37.64 | $9.17 | $13.61 | $20.32 | $50.56 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +62.6% | +48.2% | +60.2% | +64.1% | +98.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.2 | 58.3 | 42.5 | 40.2 | 63.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.2M | 1.4M | 14.0M | 4.1M | 2.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CAG and HRL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LW as "Hold", NOMD as "Buy", CAG as "Hold", HRL as "Hold", TSN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 43.0% upside for NOMD (target: $14) vs 9.7% for TSN (target: $75). For income investors, CAG offers the higher dividend yield at 9.91% vs TSN's 2.93%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $49.60 | $13.50 | $17.55 | $27.25 | $75.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 17 | 13 | 25 | 29 | 30 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.5% | +7.6% | +9.9% | +5.6% | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 7 | 2 | 6 | 34 | 13 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.45 | $0.61 | $1.40 | $1.15 | $2.00 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.0% | +17.7% | +0.9% | 0.0% | +0.8% |
NOMD leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). LW leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
LW vs NOMD vs CAG vs HRL vs TSN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LW or NOMD or CAG or HRL or TSN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Tyson Foods, Inc.
(TSN) is the stronger pick with 2. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 2% for Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD). Conagra Brands, Inc. (CAG) offers the better valuation at 5. 9x trailing P/E (8. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — LW or NOMD or CAG or HRL or TSN?
On trailing P/E, Conagra Brands, Inc.
(CAG) is the cheapest at 5. 9x versus Tyson Foods, Inc. at 50. 3x. On forward P/E, Nomad Foods Limited is actually cheaper at 6. 2x — 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: Conagra Brands, Inc. wins at 1. 19x versus Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. 's 189. 58x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LW or NOMD or CAG or HRL or TSN?
Over the past 5 years, Tyson Foods, Inc.
(TSN) delivered a total return of -1. 0%, compared to -62. 1% for Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LW returned +52. 8% versus CAG's -28. 5%. 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 — LW or NOMD or CAG or HRL or TSN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Conagra Brands, Inc.
(CAG) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 07β versus Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. 's 0. 69β — meaning LW is approximately 965% more volatile than CAG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Hormel Foods Corporation (HRL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 36% versus 2% for Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LW or NOMD or CAG or HRL or TSN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Tyson Foods, Inc.
(TSN) is pulling ahead at 2. 1% versus -2. 2% for Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 0. 0% year-over-year, compared to -40. 8% for Hormel Foods Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, LW leads at 16. 3% 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 — LW or NOMD or CAG or HRL or TSN?
Conagra Brands, Inc.
(CAG) is the more profitable company, earning 9. 9% net margin versus 0. 9% for Tyson Foods, Inc. — meaning it keeps 9. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CAG leads at 11. 8% versus 2. 6% for TSN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NOMD leads at 27. 1%, 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 LW or NOMD or CAG or HRL or TSN 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, Conagra Brands, Inc. (CAG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 19x versus Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. 's 189. 58x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD) trades at 6. 2x forward P/E versus 17. 0x for Tyson Foods, Inc. — 10. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NOMD: 43. 0% to $13. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — LW or NOMD or CAG or HRL or TSN?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Conagra Brands, Inc. (CAG) offers the highest yield at 9. 9%, versus 2. 9% for Tyson Foods, Inc. (TSN).
09Is LW or NOMD or CAG or HRL or TSN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
08), 7. 6% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NOMD: +31. 8%, LW: +52. 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 LW and NOMD and CAG and HRL and TSN?
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: LW is a small-cap deep-value stock; NOMD is a small-cap deep-value stock; CAG is a small-cap deep-value stock; HRL is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; TSN is a mid-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.