Food Confectioners
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
TR vs RMCF
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Food Confectioners
TR vs RMCF — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Food Confectioners | Food Confectioners |
| Market Cap | $3.15B | $21M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $733M | $30M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $100M | $-4M |
| Gross Margin | 35.5% | 21.0% |
| Operating Margin | 14.0% | -10.9% |
| Forward P/E | 22.3x | — |
| Total Debt | $14M | $7M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $128M | $720K |
TR vs RMCF — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tootsie Roll Indust… (TR) | 100 | 144.5 | +44.5% |
| Rocky Mountain Choc… (RMCF) | 100 | 62.0 | -38.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TR vs RMCF
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta -0.03, yield 0.9%
- Rev growth 1.3%, EPS growth 16.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 2.2%
- 74.1% 10Y total return vs RMCF's -55.1%
RMCF is the clearest fit if your priority is growth and momentum.
- 5.8% revenue growth vs TR's 1.3%
- +100.0% vs TR's +33.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.8% revenue growth vs TR's 1.3% | |
| Quality / Margins | 13.7% margin vs RMCF's -13.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Lower D/E ratio (1.5% vs 103.4%) | |
| Dividends | 0.9% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.0% vs TR's +33.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.3% ROA vs RMCF's -19.5%, ROIC 9.8% vs -35.7% |
TR vs RMCF — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TR vs RMCF — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TR is the larger business by revenue, generating $733M annually — 24.7x RMCF's $30M. TR is the more profitable business, keeping 13.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RMCF's -13.6%. On growth, TR holds the edge at +1.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $733M | $30M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $122M | -$2M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $100M | -$4M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $96M | -$2M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.5% | +21.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +14.0% | -10.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +13.7% | -13.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +13.2% | -7.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.5% | -4.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +21.9% | +81.8% |
Valuation Metrics
RMCF leads this category, winning 3 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.1B | $21M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.0B | $27M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 30.54x | -3.09x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 22.26x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.62x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 24.88x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.29x | 0.70x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.24x | 2.70x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 32.64x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
TR leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TR delivers a 11.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $-67 for RMCF. TR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to RMCF's 1.03x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TR scores 7/9 vs RMCF's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +11.0% | -67.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.3% | -19.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.8% | -35.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.3% | -44.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 1.03x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$114M | $6M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $128M | $720,000 |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $14M | $7M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 276.65x | -3.92x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TR five years ago would be worth $16,229 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,493 for RMCF. Over the past 12 months, RMCF leads with a +100.0% total return vs TR's +33.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TR at 7.2% vs RMCF's -21.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +18.4% | +37.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +33.9% | +100.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +23.3% | -50.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +62.3% | -55.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +74.1% | -55.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +7.2% | -21.0% |
Risk & Volatility
TR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TR is the less volatile stock with a -0.03 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RMCF's 1.10 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TR currently trades 92.9% from its 52-week high vs RMCF's 89.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.03x | 1.10x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $45.06 | $2.99 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $29.78 | $1.14 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +92.9% | +89.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.4 | 65.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 126K | 30K |
Analyst Outlook
TR leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
TR is the only dividend payer here at 0.85% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.9% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.36 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.2% | 0.0% |
TR leads in 5 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). RMCF leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
TR vs RMCF: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TR or RMCF a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory, Inc.
(RMCF) is the stronger pick with 5. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 3% for Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc. (TR). Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc. (TR) offers the better valuation at 30. 5x trailing P/E (22. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. 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 is the better long-term investment — TR or RMCF?
Over the past 5 years, Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc.
(TR) delivered a total return of +62. 3%, compared to -55. 1% for Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory, Inc. (RMCF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TR returned +74. 1% versus RMCF's -55. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — TR or RMCF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc.
(TR) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 03β versus Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory, Inc. 's 1. 10β — meaning RMCF is approximately -4449% more volatile than TR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc. (TR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 103% for Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — TR or RMCF?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory, Inc.
(RMCF) is pulling ahead at 5. 8% versus 1. 3% for Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc. (TR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc. grew EPS 16. 1% year-over-year, compared to -30. 3% for Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TR leads at 2. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — TR or RMCF?
Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc.
(TR) is the more profitable company, earning 13. 7% net margin versus -20. 7% for Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory, Inc. — meaning it keeps 13. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TR leads at 14. 0% versus -20. 1% for RMCF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TR leads at 35. 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — TR or RMCF?
In this comparison, TR (0.
9% yield) pays a dividend. RMCF does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is TR or RMCF better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc.
(TR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 03), 0. 9% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TR: +74. 1%, RMCF: -55. 1%), 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.
08What are the main differences between TR and RMCF?
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.
TR pays a dividend while RMCF 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.