Paper, Lumber & Forest Products
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SLVM vs IP vs PKG vs CLW vs GPK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Packaging & Containers
Packaging & Containers
Paper, Lumber & Forest Products
Packaging & Containers
SLVM vs IP vs PKG vs CLW vs GPK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Paper, Lumber & Forest Products | Packaging & Containers | Packaging & Containers | Paper, Lumber & Forest Products | Packaging & Containers |
| Market Cap | $1.97B | $17.52B | $19.93B | $221M | $3.27B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.43B | $24.97B | $8.99B | $1.54B | $8.65B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $180M | $-3.35B | $773M | $-27M | $274M |
| Gross Margin | 21.2% | 27.8% | 21.0% | 5.1% | 13.4% |
| Operating Margin | 9.5% | -10.5% | 13.6% | -0.1% | 7.5% |
| Forward P/E | 15.6x | 21.8x | 21.7x | — | 13.0x |
| Total Debt | $804M | $10.80B | $4.36B | $422M | $5.57B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $205M | $1.15B | $529M | $31K | $261M |
SLVM vs IP vs PKG vs CLW vs GPK — 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% |
| International Paper… (IP) | 100 | 62.5 | -37.5% |
| Packaging Corporati… (PKG) | 100 | 162.6 | +62.6% |
| Clearwater Paper Co… (CLW) | 100 | 35.7 | -64.3% |
| Graphic Packaging H… (GPK) | 100 | 58.0 | -42.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SLVM vs IP vs PKG vs CLW vs GPK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SLVM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.79, yield 3.4%
IP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 33.7%, EPS growth -5.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.6%
- 33.7% revenue growth vs GPK's -2.2%
- 5.6% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs GPK's 3.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
PKG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 299.8% 10Y total return vs SLVM's 97.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.76, Low D/E 94.9%, current ratio 3.17x
- Beta 0.76, yield 2.2%, current ratio 3.17x
- 8.6% margin vs IP's -13.4%
Among these 5 stocks, CLW doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
GPK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.66 vs PKG's 1.79
- Better valuation composite
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 33.7% revenue growth vs GPK's -2.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.6% margin vs IP's -13.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.76 vs CLW's 1.31 | |
| Dividends | 5.6% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs GPK's 3.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +26.9% vs GPK's -47.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.7% ROA vs IP's -8.5%, ROIC 12.6% vs -11.3% |
SLVM vs IP vs PKG vs CLW vs GPK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
SLVM vs IP vs PKG vs CLW vs GPK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
PKG leads in 3 of 6 categories
CLW leads 1 • SLVM leads 1 • IP leads 0 • GPK leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PKG leads this category, winning 4 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. PKG is the more profitable business, keeping 8.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IP's -13.4%. On growth, PKG holds the edge at +10.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.4B | $25.0B | $9.0B | $1.5B | $8.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $503M | $154M | $1.9B | $69M | $1.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $180M | -$3.4B | $773M | -$27M | $274M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $106M | $553M | $729M | -$54M | $293M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.2% | +27.8% | +21.0% | +5.1% | +13.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.5% | -10.5% | +13.6% | -0.1% | +7.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.2% | -13.4% | +8.6% | -1.8% | +3.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +3.1% | +2.2% | +8.1% | -3.5% | +3.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -12.3% | +1.2% | +10.1% | -4.7% | +1.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -37.9% | +145.8% | -53.9% | -110.5% | -133.3% |
Valuation Metrics
CLW leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.1x trailing earnings, SLVM trades at a 77% valuation discount to PKG's 26.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), GPK offers better value at 0.38x vs PKG's 2.15x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.0B | $17.5B | $19.9B | $221M | $3.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.6B | $27.2B | $23.8B | $642M | $8.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 6.09x | -4.93x | 26.04x | -11.04x | 7.46x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.58x | 21.80x | 21.68x | — | 12.97x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.15x | — | 0.38x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 4.25x | 1293.97x | 12.46x | 5.76x | 6.10x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.52x | 0.70x | 2.22x | 0.14x | 0.38x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.17x | 1.18x | 4.35x | 0.27x | 0.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 7.93x | — | 27.36x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
SLVM leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SLVM delivers a 18.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $-20 for IP. CLW carries lower financial leverage with a 0.51x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GPK's 1.67x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SLVM scores 8/9 vs PKG's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +18.4% | -20.4% | +16.7% | -3.3% | +8.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.7% | -8.5% | +7.7% | -1.7% | +2.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +21.6% | -11.3% | +12.6% | +1.2% | +7.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +21.7% | -11.6% | +14.2% | +1.4% | +9.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.95x | 0.73x | 0.95x | 0.51x | 1.67x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $599M | $9.7B | $3.8B | $422M | $5.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $205M | $1.1B | $529M | $30,700 | $261M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $804M | $10.8B | $4.4B | $422M | $5.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 7.03x | -8.89x | 13.99x | -4.32x | 5.47x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PKG leads this category, winning 5 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 $4,369 for CLW. Over the past 12 months, PKG leads with a +26.9% total return vs GPK's -47.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PKG at 20.6% vs CLW's -25.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -6.7% | -15.5% | +6.4% | -22.7% | -26.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -23.2% | -19.6% | +26.9% | -47.4% | -47.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.4% | +20.7% | +75.3% | -58.2% | -52.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +97.9% | -26.6% | +61.6% | -56.3% | -33.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +97.9% | +29.2% | +299.8% | -77.2% | +12.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.1% | +6.5% | +20.6% | -25.2% | -22.0% |
Risk & Volatility
PKG leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PKG is the less volatile stock with a 0.76 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CLW's 1.31 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PKG currently trades 89.5% from its 52-week high vs CLW's 44.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.79x | 1.20x | 0.76x | 1.31x | 0.88x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $60.51 | $56.13 | $249.51 | $30.96 | $23.76 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $37.09 | $29.45 | $178.32 | $11.73 | $8.79 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.2% | +58.9% | +89.5% | +44.2% | +46.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.3 | 46.2 | 62.4 | 49.7 | 68.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 322K | 6.8M | 918K | 198K | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — SLVM and IP and GPK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SLVM as "Buy", IP as "Buy", PKG as "Hold", CLW as "Buy", GPK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 40.3% upside for IP (target: $46) vs 9.7% for PKG (target: $245). For income investors, IP offers the higher dividend yield at 5.59% vs PKG's 2.25%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $50.00 | $46.40 | $245.00 | $15.50 | $12.60 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 29 | 26 | 10 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.4% | +5.6% | +2.2% | — | +3.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 1 | 1 | — | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.48 | $1.85 | $5.02 | — | $0.43 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.5% | +0.4% | +0.8% | +7.8% | +5.6% |
PKG leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). CLW leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
SLVM vs IP vs PKG vs CLW vs GPK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SLVM or IP or PKG or CLW or GPK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, International Paper Company (IP) is the stronger pick with 33.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 2% for Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK). 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 IP or PKG or CLW or GPK?
On trailing P/E, Sylvamo Corporation (SLVM) is the cheapest at 6.
1x versus Packaging Corporation of America at 26. 0x. On forward P/E, Graphic Packaging Holding Company is actually cheaper at 13. 0x — 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: Graphic Packaging Holding Company wins at 0. 66x versus Packaging Corporation of America's 1. 79x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SLVM or IP or PKG or CLW or GPK?
Over the past 5 years, Sylvamo Corporation (SLVM) delivered a total return of +97.
9%, compared to -56. 3% for Clearwater Paper Corporation (CLW). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PKG returned +299. 8% 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 IP or PKG or CLW or GPK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Packaging Corporation of America (PKG) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
76β versus Clearwater Paper Corporation's 1. 31β — meaning CLW is approximately 74% more volatile than PKG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Clearwater Paper Corporation (CLW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 51% versus 167% for Graphic Packaging Holding Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SLVM or IP or PKG or CLW or GPK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), International Paper Company (IP) is pulling ahead at 33.
7% versus -2. 2% for Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Sylvamo Corporation grew EPS 21. 1% 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 IP or PKG or CLW or GPK?
Packaging Corporation of America (PKG) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
6% net margin versus -14. 1% for International Paper Company — meaning it keeps 8. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PKG leads at 14. 0% 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 IP or PKG or CLW or GPK 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, Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 66x versus Packaging Corporation of America's 1. 79x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK) trades at 13. 0x forward P/E versus 21. 8x for International Paper Company — 8. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IP: 40. 3% to $46. 40.
08Which pays a better dividend — SLVM or IP or PKG or CLW or GPK?
In this comparison, IP (5.
6% yield), GPK (3. 9% yield), SLVM (3. 4% yield), PKG (2. 2% yield) pay a dividend. CLW does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SLVM or IP or PKG or CLW or GPK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Packaging Corporation of America (PKG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
76), 2. 2% yield, +299. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PKG: +299. 8%, CLW: -77. 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 IP and PKG and CLW and GPK?
These companies operate in different sectors (SLVM (Basic Materials) and IP (Consumer Cyclical) and PKG (Consumer Cyclical) and CLW (Basic Materials) and GPK (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; IP is a mid-cap high-growth stock; PKG is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CLW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GPK is a small-cap deep-value stock. SLVM, IP, PKG, GPK 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.