Household & Personal Products
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NWL vs CENT vs SPB vs ACCO vs WMT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Packaged Foods
Household & Personal Products
Business Equipment & Supplies
Specialty Retail
NWL vs CENT vs SPB vs ACCO vs WMT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Household & Personal Products | Packaged Foods | Household & Personal Products | Business Equipment & Supplies | Specialty Retail |
| Market Cap | $1.89B | $2.40B | $1.83B | $375M | $1.04T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7.19B | $3.16B | $2.79B | $1.55B | $703.06B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-281M | $171M | $105M | $74M | $22.91B |
| Gross Margin | 34.0% | 32.2% | 36.6% | 30.7% | 24.9% |
| Operating Margin | 6.4% | 8.2% | 4.1% | 7.9% | 4.1% |
| Forward P/E | 7.9x | 13.5x | 14.8x | 4.8x | 44.7x |
| Total Debt | $5.65B | $1.44B | $654M | $921M | $67.09B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $203M | $882M | $124M | $64M | $10.73B |
NWL vs CENT vs SPB vs ACCO vs WMT — 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 | 33.8 | -66.2% |
| Central Garden & Pe… (CENT) | 100 | 134.1 | +34.1% |
| Spectrum Brands Hol… (SPB) | 100 | 166.1 | +66.1% |
| ACCO Brands Corpora… (ACCO) | 100 | 65.6 | -34.4% |
| Walmart Inc. (WMT) | 100 | 314.9 | +214.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NWL vs CENT vs SPB vs ACCO vs WMT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NWL lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
CENT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.65, Low D/E 90.9%, current ratio 3.67x
- 5.4% margin vs NWL's -3.9%
SPB is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.15 vs CENT's 4.52
ACCO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive is your priority.
- Beta 1.33, yield 7.1%, current ratio 1.61x
- Lower P/E (4.8x vs 44.7x)
- 7.1% yield, vs WMT's 0.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
WMT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 37 yrs, beta 0.12, yield 0.7%
- Rev growth 4.7%, EPS growth 13.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.3%
- 499.5% 10Y total return vs CENT's 161.6%
- 4.7% revenue growth vs ACCO's -8.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 4.7% revenue growth vs ACCO's -8.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (4.8x vs 44.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 5.4% margin vs NWL's -3.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.12 vs NWL's 1.91, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 7.1% yield, vs WMT's 0.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +32.7% vs NWL's -5.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.9% ROA vs NWL's -2.5%, ROIC 14.7% vs 4.3% |
NWL vs CENT vs SPB vs ACCO vs WMT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
NWL vs CENT vs SPB vs ACCO vs WMT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
WMT leads in 3 of 6 categories
CENT leads 1 • ACCO leads 1 • NWL leads 0 • SPB leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CENT 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 — 453.3x ACCO's $1.6B. 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 | $2.8B | $1.6B | $703.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $696M | $302M | $214M | $177M | $42.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$281M | $171M | $105M | $74M | $22.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $19M | $282M | $303M | $49M | $15.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.0% | +32.2% | +36.6% | +30.7% | +24.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.4% | +8.2% | +4.1% | +7.9% | +4.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.9% | +5.4% | +3.8% | +4.8% | +3.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +0.3% | +8.9% | +10.9% | +3.2% | +2.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -1.1% | +8.7% | -3.3% | +8.3% | +5.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.9% | +30.6% | +48.8% | +2.4% | +35.1% |
Valuation Metrics
ACCO leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.2x trailing earnings, ACCO trades at a 81% valuation discount to WMT's 47.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), SPB offers better value at 1.57x vs CENT's 5.04x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.9B | $2.4B | $1.8B | $375M | $1.04T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $7.3B | $3.0B | $2.4B | $1.2B | $1.09T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -6.54x | 15.11x | 20.37x | 9.23x | 47.69x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.93x | 13.55x | 14.84x | 4.83x | 44.71x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 5.04x | 1.57x | — | 4.33x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.68x | 8.45x | 10.59x | 6.80x | 24.85x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.26x | 0.77x | 0.65x | 0.25x | 1.46x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.78x | 1.55x | 1.07x | 0.57x | 10.45x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 111.23x | 8.25x | 11.04x | 7.37x | 24.97x |
Profitability & Efficiency
WMT leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
WMT delivers a 22.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $-11 for NWL. SPB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.34x 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% | +5.5% | +11.3% | +22.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.5% | +4.7% | +3.0% | +3.2% | +7.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.3% | +9.1% | +3.9% | +5.5% | +14.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.3% | +8.7% | +4.2% | +6.1% | +17.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.36x | 0.91x | 0.34x | 1.39x | 0.67x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $5.4B | $558M | $531M | $856M | $56.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $203M | $882M | $124M | $64M | $10.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.7B | $1.4B | $654M | $921M | $67.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.01x | 1200.51x | 3.33x | 2.50x | 11.85x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WMT leads this category, winning 5 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 $2,453 for NWL. Over the past 12 months, WMT leads with a +32.7% total return vs NWL's -5.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WMT at 37.6% vs NWL's -19.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +21.5% | +20.6% | +31.7% | +12.1% | +15.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -5.4% | +11.8% | +30.1% | +22.8% | +32.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.8% | +30.9% | +14.2% | -4.4% | +160.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -75.5% | -17.2% | -7.8% | -39.3% | +186.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -75.8% | +161.6% | +11.9% | -35.1% | +499.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -19.5% | +9.4% | +4.5% | -1.5% | +37.6% |
Risk & Volatility
WMT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WMT is the less volatile stock with a 0.12 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. WMT currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs NWL's 67.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.91x | 0.65x | 0.82x | 1.33x | 0.12x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.64 | $41.30 | $86.95 | $4.29 | $134.69 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.07 | $28.77 | $49.99 | $2.81 | $91.89 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +67.0% | +93.3% | +90.4% | +94.6% | +96.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 64.6 | 47.2 | 61.3 | 74.3 | 55.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.9M | 74K | 318K | 1.2M | 17.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ACCO and WMT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NWL as "Hold", CENT as "Buy", SPB as "Buy", ACCO as "Hold", WMT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 97.0% upside for ACCO (target: $8) vs 5.3% for WMT (target: $137). For income investors, ACCO offers the higher dividend yield at 7.07% vs WMT's 0.72%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $5.50 | $51.00 | $85.00 | $8.00 | $137.04 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 26 | 10 | 21 | 7 | 64 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +6.4% | — | +2.4% | +7.1% | +0.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 37 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.29 | — | $1.86 | $0.29 | $0.94 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +6.5% | +17.8% | +4.0% | +0.8% |
WMT leads in 3 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). CENT leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
NWL vs CENT vs SPB vs ACCO vs WMT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NWL or CENT or SPB or ACCO or WMT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Walmart Inc.
(WMT) is the stronger pick with 4. 7% 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 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 or SPB or ACCO or WMT?
On trailing P/E, ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) is the cheapest at 9.
2x versus Walmart Inc. at 47. 7x. On forward P/E, ACCO Brands Corporation is actually cheaper at 4. 8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc. wins at 1. 15x versus Central Garden & Pet Company's 4. 52x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NWL or CENT or SPB or ACCO or WMT?
Over the past 5 years, Walmart Inc.
(WMT) delivered a total return of +186. 9%, compared to -75. 5% for Newell Brands Inc. (NWL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WMT returned +499. 5% versus NWL's -75. 8%. 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 or SPB or ACCO or WMT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Walmart Inc.
(WMT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 12β versus Newell Brands Inc. 's 1. 91β — meaning NWL is approximately 1538% more volatile than WMT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc. (SPB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 34% versus 2% for Newell Brands Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NWL or CENT or SPB or ACCO or WMT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Walmart Inc.
(WMT) is pulling ahead at 4. 7% 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 -30. 8% for Newell Brands Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, WMT leads at 5. 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 — NWL or CENT or SPB or ACCO or WMT?
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 4. 2% for WMT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SPB leads at 36. 7%, 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 or SPB or ACCO or WMT 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, Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc. (SPB) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 15x versus Central Garden & Pet Company's 4. 52x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) trades at 4. 8x forward P/E versus 44. 7x for Walmart Inc. — 39. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ACCO: 97. 0% to $8. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NWL or CENT or SPB or ACCO or WMT?
In this comparison, ACCO (7.
1% yield), NWL (6. 4% yield), SPB (2. 4% yield), WMT (0. 7% yield) pay a dividend. CENT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NWL or CENT or SPB or ACCO or WMT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Walmart Inc.
(WMT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 12), 0. 7% yield, +499. 5% 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 (WMT: +499. 5%, NWL: -75. 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 NWL and CENT and SPB and ACCO and WMT?
These companies operate in different sectors (NWL (Consumer Defensive) and CENT (Consumer Defensive) and SPB (Consumer Defensive) and ACCO (Industrials) and WMT (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: NWL is a small-cap income-oriented stock; CENT is a small-cap deep-value stock; SPB is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ACCO is a small-cap deep-value stock; WMT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. NWL, SPB, ACCO, WMT pay 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.