Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SOWG vs JBSS vs SMPL vs SFM vs BYND
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Packaged Foods
Packaged Foods
Grocery Stores
Packaged Foods
SOWG vs JBSS vs SMPL vs SFM vs BYND — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods | Grocery Stores | Packaged Foods |
| Market Cap | $1M | $913M | $1.24B | $7.62B | $414M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $1.14B | $1.45B | $8.90B | $265M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-41M | $70M | $91M | $507M | $244M |
| Gross Margin | — | 19.1% | 34.0% | 37.0% | 3.5% |
| Operating Margin | — | 8.9% | 14.4% | 7.6% | -82.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 11.9x | 7.4x | 14.9x | — |
| Total Debt | $2M | $102M | $304M | $1.94B | $508M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1M | $585K | $98M | $257M | $208M |
SOWG vs JBSS vs SMPL vs SFM vs BYND — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sow Good Inc. (SOWG) | 100 | 2.2 | -97.8% |
| John B. Sanfilippo … (JBSS) | 100 | 89.7 | -10.3% |
| The Simply Good Foo… (SMPL) | 100 | 72.0 | -28.0% |
| Sprouts Farmers Mar… (SFM) | 100 | 329.6 | +229.6% |
| Beyond Meat, Inc. (BYND) | 100 | 0.6 | -99.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SOWG vs JBSS vs SMPL vs SFM vs BYND
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, SOWG doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
JBSS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in dividends and momentum.
- 2.7% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
- +39.3% vs SOWG's -87.0%
SMPL is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.38, Low D/E 16.8%, current ratio 3.64x
- PEG 0.31 vs JBSS's 8.42
- Better valuation composite
SFM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.17
- Rev growth 14.1%, EPS growth 41.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.2%
- 203.9% 10Y total return vs JBSS's 101.1%
- Beta 0.17, current ratio 0.93x
BYND ranks third and is worth considering specifically for quality and efficiency.
- 92.2% margin vs SOWG's -4.2%
- 39.3% ROA vs SOWG's -123.1%, ROIC -44.4% vs -21.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.1% revenue growth vs SOWG's -100.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 92.2% margin vs SOWG's -4.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.17 vs BYND's 1.67 | |
| Dividends | 2.7% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +39.3% vs SOWG's -87.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 39.3% ROA vs SOWG's -123.1%, ROIC -44.4% vs -21.5% |
SOWG vs JBSS vs SMPL vs SFM vs BYND — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
SOWG vs JBSS vs SMPL vs SFM vs BYND — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
SFM leads in 3 of 6 categories
SMPL leads 1 • SOWG leads 0 • JBSS leads 0 • BYND leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — SMPL and BYND each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SFM and SOWG operate at a comparable scale, with $8.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. BYND is the more profitable business, keeping 92.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SFM's 5.7%. On growth, JBSS holds the edge at +4.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $1.1B | $1.4B | $8.9B | $265M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$5M | $127M | $231M | $996M | -$187M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$41M | $70M | $91M | $507M | $244M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$5M | $33M | $174M | $361M | -$134M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +19.1% | +34.0% | +37.0% | +3.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +8.9% | +14.4% | +7.6% | -82.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +6.2% | +6.3% | +5.7% | +92.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +2.9% | +12.0% | +4.1% | -50.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.3% | +4.6% | -0.3% | +4.1% | -15.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.9% | +31.9% | -31.6% | -5.5% | +90.9% |
Valuation Metrics
SMPL leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.2x trailing earnings, SMPL trades at a 21% valuation discount to JBSS's 15.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), SMPL offers better value at 0.51x vs JBSS's 11.02x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1M | $913M | $1.2B | $7.6B | $414M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1M | $1.0B | $1.4B | $9.3B | $714M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.02x | 15.53x | 12.20x | 15.25x | -0.49x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 11.87x | 7.39x | 14.85x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 11.02x | 0.51x | 0.90x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 8.73x | 5.97x | 9.35x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 0.82x | 0.86x | 0.86x | 1.50x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 2.54x | 0.70x | 5.70x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 7.86x | 16.29x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
SFM leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SFM delivers a 36.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 in annual profit, vs $-2 for SOWG. SMPL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SFM's 1.39x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SMPL scores 5/9 vs SOWG's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.1% | +19.5% | +5.2% | +36.1% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -123.1% | +11.7% | +3.7% | +12.5% | +39.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -21.5% | +15.2% | +8.1% | +17.8% | -44.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -29.4% | +20.4% | +9.4% | +22.1% | -40.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.28x | 0.17x | 1.39x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $95,146 | $102M | $206M | $1.7B | $300M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1M | $585,000 | $98M | $257M | $208M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2M | $102M | $304M | $1.9B | $508M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -33.23x | 26.02x | 6.77x | 254.65x | -11.47x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SFM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SFM five years ago would be worth $31,381 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $81 for BYND. Over the past 12 months, JBSS leads with a +39.3% total return vs SOWG's -87.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SFM at 31.2% vs SOWG's -73.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -76.6% | +14.1% | -36.4% | +0.4% | +1.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -87.0% | +39.3% | -64.8% | -51.7% | -64.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.1% | -22.9% | -67.8% | +125.7% | -93.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.5% | +4.0% | -64.3% | +213.8% | -99.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.6% | +101.1% | +3.7% | +203.9% | -98.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -73.3% | -8.3% | -31.5% | +31.2% | -59.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — JBSS and SFM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SFM is the less volatile stock with a 0.17 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BYND's 1.67 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JBSS currently trades 91.7% from its 52-week high vs SOWG's 3.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.07x | 0.32x | 0.34x | 0.16x | 1.82x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $31.80 | $85.15 | $36.92 | $182.00 | $7.69 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.70 | $58.47 | $10.21 | $64.75 | $0.50 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +3.8% | +91.7% | +33.7% | +44.5% | +11.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 21.2 | 49.2 | 42.9 | 54.9 | 60.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 374K | 80K | 2.8M | 2.2M | 59.5M |
Analyst Outlook
SFM leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: JBSS as "Buy", SMPL as "Buy", SFM as "Buy", BYND as "Sell". Consensus price targets imply 4889.9% upside for BYND (target: $45) vs 12.4% for SFM (target: $91). JBSS is the only dividend payer here at 2.67% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Sell |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $18.33 | $91.00 | $44.55 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 2 | 24 | 43 | 21 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.7% | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | — | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.08 | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.1% | +4.1% | +6.2% | 0.0% |
SFM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). SMPL leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
SOWG vs JBSS vs SMPL vs SFM vs BYND: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SOWG or JBSS or SMPL or SFM or BYND a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.
(SFM) is the stronger pick with 14. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Sow Good Inc. (SOWG). The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) offers the better valuation at 12. 2x trailing P/E (7. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. (JBSS) 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 — SOWG or JBSS or SMPL or SFM or BYND?
On trailing P/E, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the cheapest at 12.
2x versus John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. at 15. 5x. On forward P/E, The Simply Good Foods Company is actually cheaper at 7. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: The Simply Good Foods Company wins at 0. 31x versus John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. 's 8. 42x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SOWG or JBSS or SMPL or SFM or BYND?
Over the past 5 years, Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.
(SFM) delivered a total return of +213. 8%, compared to -99. 2% for Beyond Meat, Inc. (BYND). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SFM returned +210. 8% versus SOWG's -99. 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 — SOWG or JBSS or SMPL or SFM or BYND?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.
(SFM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 16β versus Beyond Meat, Inc. 's 1. 82β — meaning BYND is approximately 1043% more volatile than SFM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 139% for Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SOWG or JBSS or SMPL or SFM or BYND?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.
(SFM) is pulling ahead at 14. 1% versus -100. 0% for Sow Good Inc. (SOWG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc. grew EPS 41. 6% year-over-year, compared to -760. 0% for Sow Good Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SFM leads at 11. 2% 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 — SOWG or JBSS or SMPL or SFM or BYND?
Beyond Meat, Inc.
(BYND) is the more profitable company, earning 79. 8% net margin versus 0. 0% for Sow Good Inc. — meaning it keeps 79. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SMPL leads at 15. 1% versus -84. 7% for BYND. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SFM leads at 37. 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 SOWG or JBSS or SMPL or SFM or BYND 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, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 31x versus John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. 's 8. 42x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, The Simply Good Foods Company (SMPL) trades at 7. 4x forward P/E versus 14. 9x for Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc. — 7. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BYND: 4889. 9% to $44. 55.
08Which pays a better dividend — SOWG or JBSS or SMPL or SFM or BYND?
In this comparison, JBSS (2.
7% yield) pays a dividend. SOWG, SMPL, SFM, BYND do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SOWG or JBSS or SMPL or SFM or BYND better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, John B.
Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. (JBSS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 32), 2. 7% yield, +100. 8% 10Y return). Beyond Meat, Inc. (BYND) carries a higher beta of 1. 82 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (JBSS: +100. 8%, BYND: -98. 7%), 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 SOWG and JBSS and SMPL and SFM and BYND?
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: SOWG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JBSS is a small-cap deep-value stock; SMPL is a small-cap deep-value stock; SFM is a small-cap deep-value stock; BYND is a small-cap quality compounder stock. JBSS pays a dividend while SOWG, SMPL, SFM, BYND do 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.