Paper, Lumber & Forest Products
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SLVM vs CLW vs MERC vs SON vs IP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Paper, Lumber & Forest Products
Paper, Lumber & Forest Products
Packaging & Containers
Packaging & Containers
SLVM vs CLW vs MERC vs SON vs IP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Paper, Lumber & Forest Products | Paper, Lumber & Forest Products | Paper, Lumber & Forest Products | Packaging & Containers | Packaging & Containers |
| Market Cap | $1.97B | $221M | $74M | $5.10B | $17.52B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.43B | $1.54B | $1.85B | $7.49B | $24.97B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $180M | $-27M | $-528M | $1.04B | $-3.35B |
| Gross Margin | 21.2% | 5.1% | -3.5% | 20.9% | 27.8% |
| Operating Margin | 9.5% | -0.1% | -12.0% | 8.7% | -10.5% |
| Forward P/E | 15.6x | — | — | 8.8x | 21.8x |
| Total Debt | $804M | $422M | $1.61B | $4.85B | $10.80B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $205M | $31K | $187M | $378M | $1.15B |
SLVM vs CLW vs MERC vs SON vs IP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sylvamo Corporation (SLVM) | 100 | 133.8 | +33.8% |
| Clearwater Paper Co… (CLW) | 100 | 35.7 | -64.3% |
| Mercer Internationa… (MERC) | 100 | 9.6 | -90.4% |
| Sonoco Products Com… (SON) | 100 | 86.8 | -13.2% |
| International Paper… (IP) | 100 | 62.5 | -37.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SLVM vs CLW vs MERC vs SON vs IP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SLVM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 97.9% 10Y total return vs SON's 48.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.79, Low D/E 94.9%, current ratio 1.56x
CLW lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
MERC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive is your priority.
- Beta 2.06, yield 13.5%, current ratio 3.05x
- 13.5% yield, vs SON's 4.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
SON carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 30 yrs, beta 0.53, yield 4.0%
- Rev growth 41.7%, EPS growth 141.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.7%
- 41.7% revenue growth vs MERC's -8.6%
- Lower P/E (8.8x vs 21.8x)
Among these 5 stocks, IP doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 41.7% revenue growth vs MERC's -8.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.8x vs 21.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 13.8% margin vs MERC's -28.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.53 vs MERC's 2.06, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 13.5% yield, vs SON's 4.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +21.9% vs MERC's -64.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.0% ROA vs MERC's -24.3%, ROIC 6.2% vs -8.5% |
SLVM vs CLW vs MERC vs SON vs IP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
SLVM vs CLW vs MERC vs SON vs IP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IP leads in 1 of 6 categories
SLVM leads 1 • SON leads 1 • CLW leads 0 • MERC leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IP leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IP is the larger business by revenue, generating $25.0B annually — 16.2x CLW's $1.5B. SON is the more profitable business, keeping 13.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MERC's -28.5%. On growth, IP holds the edge at +1.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.4B | $1.5B | $1.9B | $7.5B | $25.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $503M | $69M | -$102M | $1.2B | $154M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $180M | -$27M | -$528M | $1.0B | -$3.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $106M | -$54M | -$156M | $266M | $553M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.2% | +5.1% | -3.5% | +20.9% | +27.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.5% | -0.1% | -12.0% | +8.7% | -10.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.2% | -1.8% | -28.5% | +13.8% | -13.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +3.1% | -3.5% | -8.4% | +3.6% | +2.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -12.3% | -4.7% | -3.5% | -1.9% | +1.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -37.9% | -110.5% | -136.4% | +23.6% | +145.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — SLVM and CLW each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.1x trailing earnings, SLVM trades at a 53% valuation discount to SON's 13.0x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, SLVM's 4.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than IP's 1294.0x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.0B | $221M | $74M | $5.1B | $17.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.6B | $642M | $1.5B | $9.6B | $27.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 6.09x | -11.04x | -0.15x | 12.99x | -4.93x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.58x | — | — | 8.84x | 21.80x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.92x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 4.25x | 5.76x | — | 7.77x | 1293.97x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.52x | 0.14x | 0.04x | 0.68x | 0.70x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.17x | 0.27x | 1.09x | 1.42x | 1.18x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 7.93x | — | — | 12.99x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
SLVM leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SON delivers a 30.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $30 in annual profit, vs $-2 for MERC. CLW carries lower financial leverage with a 0.51x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MERC's 23.64x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SLVM scores 8/9 vs IP's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +18.4% | -3.3% | -2.4% | +30.0% | -20.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.7% | -1.7% | -24.3% | +9.0% | -8.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +21.6% | +1.2% | -8.5% | +6.2% | -11.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +21.7% | +1.4% | -9.7% | +8.3% | -11.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 7 | 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.95x | 0.51x | 23.64x | 1.34x | 0.73x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $599M | $422M | $1.4B | $4.5B | $9.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $205M | $30,700 | $187M | $378M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $804M | $422M | $1.6B | $4.9B | $10.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 7.03x | -4.32x | -2.78x | 4.60x | -8.89x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — SLVM and SON and IP each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SLVM five years ago would be worth $19,790 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,480 for MERC. Over the past 12 months, SON leads with a +21.9% total return vs MERC's -64.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IP at 6.5% vs MERC's -42.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -6.7% | -22.7% | -43.4% | +17.7% | -15.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -23.2% | -47.4% | -64.8% | +21.9% | -19.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.4% | -58.2% | -80.4% | -3.2% | +20.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +97.9% | -56.3% | -85.2% | -9.7% | -26.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +97.9% | -77.2% | -48.2% | +48.6% | +29.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.1% | -25.2% | -42.0% | -1.1% | +6.5% |
Risk & Volatility
SON leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SON is the less volatile stock with a 0.53 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MERC's 2.06 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SON currently trades 88.5% from its 52-week high vs MERC's 24.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.79x | 1.31x | 2.06x | 0.53x | 1.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $60.51 | $30.96 | $4.47 | $58.43 | $56.13 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $37.09 | $11.73 | $1.00 | $38.65 | $29.45 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.2% | +44.2% | +24.8% | +88.5% | +58.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.3 | 49.7 | 42.3 | 50.8 | 46.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 322K | 198K | 440K | 1.1M | 6.8M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — MERC and SON each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SLVM as "Buy", CLW as "Buy", MERC as "Hold", SON as "Buy", IP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 102.7% upside for MERC (target: $2) vs 13.3% for CLW (target: $16). For income investors, MERC offers the higher dividend yield at 13.51% vs SLVM's 3.38%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $50.00 | $15.50 | $2.25 | $59.00 | $46.40 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 10 | 9 | 21 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.4% | — | +13.5% | +4.0% | +5.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | — | 0 | 30 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.48 | — | $0.15 | $2.09 | $1.85 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.5% | +7.8% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.4% |
IP leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). SLVM leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
SLVM vs CLW vs MERC vs SON vs IP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SLVM or CLW or MERC or SON or IP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Sonoco Products Company (SON) is the stronger pick with 41.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 6% for Mercer International Inc. (MERC). Sylvamo Corporation (SLVM) offers the better valuation at 6. 1x trailing P/E (15. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Sylvamo Corporation (SLVM) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — SLVM or CLW or MERC or SON or IP?
On trailing P/E, Sylvamo Corporation (SLVM) is the cheapest at 6.
1x versus Sonoco Products Company at 13. 0x. On forward P/E, Sonoco Products Company is actually cheaper at 8. 8x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SLVM or CLW or MERC or SON or IP?
Over the past 5 years, Sylvamo Corporation (SLVM) delivered a total return of +97.
9%, compared to -85. 2% for Mercer International Inc. (MERC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SLVM returned +97. 9% versus CLW's -77. 2%. 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 — SLVM or CLW or MERC or SON or IP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Sonoco Products Company (SON) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
53β versus Mercer International Inc. 's 2. 06β — meaning MERC is approximately 289% more volatile than SON relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Clearwater Paper Corporation (CLW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 51% versus 24% for Mercer International Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SLVM or CLW or MERC or SON or IP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Sonoco Products Company (SON) is pulling ahead at 41.
7% versus -8. 6% for Mercer International Inc. (MERC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Sonoco Products Company grew EPS 141. 2% year-over-year, compared to -527. 4% for International Paper Company. Over a 3-year CAGR, SLVM leads at 10. 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 — SLVM or CLW or MERC or SON or IP?
Sylvamo Corporation (SLVM) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
0% net margin versus -26. 7% for Mercer International Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SLVM leads at 11. 8% versus -11. 3% for IP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — IP leads at 29. 5%, 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 SLVM or CLW or MERC or SON or IP more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Sonoco Products Company (SON) trades at 8.
8x forward P/E versus 21. 8x for International Paper Company — 13. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MERC: 102. 7% to $2. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — SLVM or CLW or MERC or SON or IP?
In this comparison, MERC (13.
5% yield), IP (5. 6% yield), SON (4. 0% yield), SLVM (3. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CLW does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SLVM or CLW or MERC or SON or IP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Sonoco Products Company (SON) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
53), 4. 0% yield). Mercer International Inc. (MERC) carries a higher beta of 2. 06 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SON: +48. 6%, MERC: -48. 2%), 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 SLVM and CLW and MERC and SON and IP?
These companies operate in different sectors (SLVM (Basic Materials) and CLW (Basic Materials) and MERC (Basic Materials) and SON (Consumer Cyclical) and IP (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: SLVM is a small-cap deep-value stock; CLW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MERC is a small-cap income-oriented stock; SON is a small-cap high-growth stock; IP is a mid-cap high-growth stock. SLVM, MERC, SON, IP pay a dividend while CLW 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.