Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
USNA vs NATR vs NUS vs NHTC vs HLF
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Packaged Foods
Household & Personal Products
Specialty Retail
Packaged Foods
USNA vs NATR vs NUS vs NHTC vs HLF — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Packaged Foods | Household & Personal Products | Specialty Retail | Packaged Foods |
| Market Cap | $359M | $430M | $345M | $36M | $1.50B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $925M | $490M | $1.49B | $38M | $5.13B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $11M | $20M | $160M | $-1M | $240M |
| Gross Margin | 76.6% | 69.9% | 69.4% | 73.8% | 76.5% |
| Operating Margin | 5.5% | 5.7% | 4.4% | -5.1% | 6.4% |
| Forward P/E | 11.2x | 21.9x | 7.0x | — | 5.6x |
| Total Debt | $14M | $19M | $364M | $3M | $2.34B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $158M | $94M | $239M | $7M | $353M |
USNA vs NATR vs NUS vs NHTC vs HLF — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| USANA Health Scienc… (USNA) | 100 | 23.0 | -77.0% |
| Nature's Sunshine P… (NATR) | 100 | 253.1 | +153.1% |
| Nu Skin Enterprises… (NUS) | 100 | 18.9 | -81.1% |
| Natural Health Tren… (NHTC) | 100 | 43.8 | -56.2% |
| Herbalife Nutrition… (HLF) | 100 | 33.1 | -66.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: USNA vs NATR vs NUS vs NHTC vs HLF
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
USNA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth.
- 8.3% revenue growth vs NUS's -14.3%
NATR is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 5.7%, EPS growth 165.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.4%
- 180.2% 10Y total return vs NUS's -48.8%
NUS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in quality and efficiency.
- 10.8% margin vs NHTC's -3.0%
- 11.3% ROA vs NHTC's -2.9%, ROIC 7.3% vs -6.5%
NHTC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.58, yield 25.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.58, Low D/E 13.4%, current ratio 2.50x
- Beta 0.58, yield 25.0%, current ratio 2.50x
- Beta 0.58 vs HLF's 1.79
HLF ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value and momentum.
- Better valuation composite
- +113.4% vs USNA's -31.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.3% revenue growth vs NUS's -14.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 10.8% margin vs NHTC's -3.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.58 vs HLF's 1.79 | |
| Dividends | 25.0% yield, vs NUS's 3.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +113.4% vs USNA's -31.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.3% ROA vs NHTC's -2.9%, ROIC 7.3% vs -6.5% |
USNA vs NATR vs NUS vs NHTC vs HLF — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
USNA vs NATR vs NUS vs NHTC vs HLF — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
USNA leads in 1 of 6 categories
NATR leads 1 • NUS leads 0 • NHTC leads 0 • HLF leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — NUS and HLF each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HLF is the larger business by revenue, generating $5.1B annually — 134.2x NHTC's $38M. NUS is the more profitable business, keeping 10.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NHTC's -3.0%. On growth, NATR holds the edge at +8.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $925M | $490M | $1.5B | $38M | $5.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $91M | $38M | $118M | -$2M | $417M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $11M | $20M | $160M | -$1M | $240M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $9M | $23M | $46M | -$6M | $374M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +76.6% | +69.9% | +69.4% | +73.8% | +76.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +5.5% | +5.7% | +4.4% | -5.1% | +6.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.2% | +4.1% | +10.8% | -3.0% | +4.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +0.9% | +4.7% | +3.1% | -16.5% | +7.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.9% | +8.5% | -16.9% | -14.3% | +7.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -142.2% | +16.0% | +139.7% | -2.4% | +16.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — NUS and HLF each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 2.2x trailing earnings, NUS trades at a 93% valuation discount to USNA's 33.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, USNA's 2.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than NATR's 9.2x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $359M | $430M | $345M | $36M | $1.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $215M | $355M | $471M | $32M | $3.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 33.55x | 23.16x | 2.21x | -41.72x | 6.59x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.18x | 21.92x | 7.02x | — | 5.63x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 2.37x | 9.20x | 3.29x | — | 6.19x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.39x | 0.90x | 0.23x | 0.90x | 0.30x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.62x | 2.81x | 0.44x | 1.57x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 42.13x | 14.90x | 7.50x | — | 5.92x |
Profitability & Efficiency
USNA leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NUS delivers a 20.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $-5 for NHTC. USNA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NUS's 0.45x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), USNA scores 7/9 vs NHTC's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +1.8% | +12.1% | +20.4% | -4.9% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.5% | +7.6% | +11.3% | -2.9% | +8.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.6% | +21.0% | +7.3% | -6.5% | +24.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.3% | +13.8% | +7.9% | -6.1% | +27.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.12x | 0.45x | 0.13x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$144M | -$75M | $126M | -$4M | $2.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $158M | $94M | $239M | $7M | $353M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $14M | $19M | $364M | $3M | $2.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 50.32x | 1100.81x | 15.14x | — | 1.64x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NATR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NATR five years ago would be worth $11,883 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,999 for USNA. Over the past 12 months, HLF leads with a +113.4% total return vs USNA's -31.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NATR at 31.8% vs NUS's -38.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +0.1% | +17.1% | -26.9% | +7.1% | +13.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -31.4% | +85.3% | +26.3% | -20.7% | +113.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -70.7% | +129.0% | -77.1% | -5.7% | +3.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -80.0% | +18.8% | -80.0% | -9.6% | -71.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -68.7% | +180.2% | -48.8% | -63.6% | -53.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -33.6% | +31.8% | -38.9% | -1.9% | +1.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NATR and NHTC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NHTC is the less volatile stock with a 0.58 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HLF's 1.79 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NATR currently trades 87.2% from its 52-week high vs NUS's 48.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.34x | 0.62x | 1.49x | 0.58x | 1.79x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $38.32 | $28.14 | $14.62 | $6.00 | $20.40 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $16.60 | $12.90 | $5.65 | $2.40 | $6.59 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +50.8% | +87.2% | +48.0% | +53.3% | +71.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.0 | 49.6 | 46.4 | 57.9 | 53.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 118K | 103K | 458K | 25K | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NATR and NHTC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: USNA as "Hold", NATR as "Buy", NUS as "Hold", HLF as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 79.9% upside for USNA (target: $35) vs -20.6% for NATR (target: $20). For income investors, NHTC offers the higher dividend yield at 25.04% vs NUS's 3.35%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $35.00 | $19.50 | $11.00 | — | $16.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 4 | 11 | — | 26 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +3.4% | +25.0% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.24 | $0.80 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +7.7% | +3.8% | +5.8% | 0.0% | +0.5% |
USNA leads in 1 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency). NATR leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.
USNA vs NATR vs NUS vs NHTC vs HLF: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is USNA or NATR or NUS or NHTC or HLF a better buy right now?
For growth investors, USANA Health Sciences, Inc.
(USNA) is the stronger pick with 8. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -14. 3% for Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc. (NUS). Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc. (NUS) offers the better valuation at 2. 2x trailing P/E (7. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Nature's Sunshine Products, Inc. (NATR) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — USNA or NATR or NUS or NHTC or HLF?
On trailing P/E, Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc.
(NUS) is the cheapest at 2. 2x versus USANA Health Sciences, Inc. at 33. 6x. On forward P/E, Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. is actually cheaper at 5. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — USNA or NATR or NUS or NHTC or HLF?
Over the past 5 years, Nature's Sunshine Products, Inc.
(NATR) delivered a total return of +18. 8%, compared to -80. 0% for USANA Health Sciences, Inc. (USNA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NATR returned +180. 2% versus USNA's -68. 7%. 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 — USNA or NATR or NUS or NHTC or HLF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Natural Health Trends Corp.
(NHTC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 58β versus Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. 's 1. 79β — meaning HLF is approximately 210% more volatile than NHTC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, USANA Health Sciences, Inc. (USNA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 45% for Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — USNA or NATR or NUS or NHTC or HLF?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), USANA Health Sciences, Inc.
(USNA) is pulling ahead at 8. 3% versus -14. 3% for Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc. (NUS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc. grew EPS 207. 8% year-over-year, compared to -254. 0% for Natural Health Trends Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NATR leads at 4. 4% 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 — USNA or NATR or NUS or NHTC or HLF?
Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc.
(NUS) is the more profitable company, earning 10. 8% net margin versus -2. 2% for Natural Health Trends Corp. — meaning it keeps 10. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HLF leads at 8. 8% versus -4. 5% for NHTC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — USNA leads at 78. 3%, 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 USNA or NATR or NUS or NHTC or HLF more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Herbalife Nutrition Ltd.
(HLF) trades at 5. 6x forward P/E versus 21. 9x for Nature's Sunshine Products, Inc. — 16. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for USNA: 79. 9% to $35. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — USNA or NATR or NUS or NHTC or HLF?
In this comparison, NHTC (25.
0% yield), NUS (3. 4% yield) pay a dividend. USNA, NATR, HLF do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is USNA or NATR or NUS or NHTC or HLF better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Natural Health Trends Corp.
(NHTC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 58), 25. 0% yield). Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. (HLF) carries a higher beta of 1. 79 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NHTC: -63. 6%, HLF: -53. 6%), 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 USNA and NATR and NUS and NHTC and HLF?
These companies operate in different sectors (USNA (Consumer Defensive) and NATR (Consumer Defensive) and NUS (Consumer Defensive) and NHTC (Consumer Cyclical) and HLF (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: USNA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NATR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NUS is a small-cap deep-value stock; NHTC is a small-cap income-oriented stock; HLF is a small-cap deep-value stock. NUS, NHTC pay a dividend while USNA, NATR, HLF 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.