Household & Personal Products
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
NWL vs CENT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Packaged Foods
NWL vs CENT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Household & Personal Products | Packaged Foods |
| Market Cap | $1.97B | $2.29B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7.19B | $3.16B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-281M | $171M |
| Gross Margin | 34.0% | 32.2% |
| Operating Margin | 6.4% | 8.2% |
| Forward P/E | 8.2x | 13.0x |
| Total Debt | $5.65B | $1.44B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $203M | $882M |
NWL vs CENT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Newell Brands Inc. (NWL) | 100 | 35.2 | -64.8% |
| Central Garden & Pe… (CENT) | 100 | 128.2 | +28.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NWL vs CENT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NWL is the clearest fit if your priority is value and dividends.
- Lower P/E (8.2x vs 13.0x)
- 6.2% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend
CENT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.65
- Rev growth -2.2%, EPS growth 57.4%, 3Y rev CAGR -2.1%
- 148.2% 10Y total return vs NWL's -75.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | -2.2% revenue growth vs NWL's -5.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.2x vs 13.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 5.4% margin vs NWL's -3.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.65 vs NWL's 1.91, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 6.2% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +6.6% vs NWL's -1.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.7% ROA vs NWL's -2.5%, ROIC 9.1% vs 4.3% |
NWL vs CENT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
NWL vs CENT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CENT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NWL is the larger business by revenue, generating $7.2B annually — 2.3x CENT's $3.2B. CENT is the more profitable business, keeping 5.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NWL's -3.9%. On growth, CENT holds the edge at +8.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $7.2B | $3.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $696M | $302M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$281M | $171M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $19M | $282M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.0% | +32.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.4% | +8.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.9% | +5.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +0.3% | +8.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -1.1% | +8.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.9% | +30.6% |
Valuation Metrics
NWL leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, CENT's 8.2x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than NWL's 9.8x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.0B | $2.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $7.4B | $2.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -6.80x | 14.44x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 8.24x | 12.95x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.82x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.78x | 8.15x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.27x | 0.73x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.81x | 1.48x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 115.61x | 7.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CENT leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CENT delivers a 10.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $-11 for NWL. CENT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.91x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NWL's 2.36x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CENT scores 8/9 vs NWL's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -11.1% | +10.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.5% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.3% | +9.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.3% | +8.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.36x | 0.91x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $5.4B | $558M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $203M | $882M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.7B | $1.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.01x | 1200.51x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CENT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CENT five years ago would be worth $7,926 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,510 for NWL. Over the past 12 months, CENT leads with a +6.6% total return vs NWL's -1.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CENT at 7.8% vs NWL's -18.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +26.2% | +15.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -1.7% | +6.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -46.1% | +25.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -74.9% | -20.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -75.0% | +148.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -18.6% | +7.8% |
Risk & Volatility
CENT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CENT is the less volatile stock with a 0.65 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NWL's 1.91 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CENT currently trades 89.3% from its 52-week high vs NWL's 69.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.91x | 0.65x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.64 | $41.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.07 | $28.77 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +69.7% | +89.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.6 | 41.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.9M | 73K |
Analyst Outlook
CENT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates NWL as "Hold" and CENT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 38.5% upside for CENT (target: $51) vs 18.9% for NWL (target: $6). NWL is the only dividend payer here at 6.20% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $5.50 | $51.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 26 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +6.2% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.29 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +6.8% |
CENT leads in 5 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NWL leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
NWL vs CENT: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NWL or CENT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) is the stronger pick with -2.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 0% for Newell Brands Inc. (NWL). Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) offers the better valuation at 14. 4x trailing P/E (13. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — NWL or CENT?
On forward P/E, Newell Brands Inc.
is actually cheaper at 8. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NWL or CENT?
Over the past 5 years, Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) delivered a total return of -20.
7%, compared to -74. 9% for Newell Brands Inc. (NWL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CENT returned +148. 2% versus NWL's -75. 0%. 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 — NWL or CENT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
65β versus Newell Brands Inc. 's 1. 91β — meaning NWL is approximately 194% more volatile than CENT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 91% versus 2% for Newell Brands Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NWL or CENT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) is pulling ahead at -2.
2% versus -5. 0% for Newell Brands Inc. (NWL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Central Garden & Pet Company grew EPS 57. 4% year-over-year, compared to -30. 8% for Newell Brands Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CENT leads at -2. 1% 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 — NWL or CENT?
Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) is the more profitable company, earning 5.
2% net margin versus -4. 0% for Newell Brands Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CENT leads at 8. 5% versus 6. 2% for NWL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NWL leads at 33. 8%, 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 NWL or CENT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Newell Brands Inc.
(NWL) trades at 8. 2x forward P/E versus 13. 0x for Central Garden & Pet Company — 4. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CENT: 38. 5% to $51. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NWL or CENT?
In this comparison, NWL (6.
2% yield) pays a dividend. CENT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NWL or CENT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Central Garden & Pet Company (CENT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
65), +148. 2% 10Y return). Newell Brands Inc. (NWL) carries a higher beta of 1. 91 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CENT: +148. 2%, NWL: -75. 0%), 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 NWL and CENT?
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: NWL is a small-cap income-oriented stock; CENT is a small-cap deep-value stock. NWL pays a dividend while CENT 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.