Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to B&G Foods, Inc.
How B&G Foods, Inc. stacks up
BGS · against 806 other Consumer Defensive companies
Growth
20/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #642 of 807 · scores higher than 20% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score80 peers with a growth score of 20–29, including BGS · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 20?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Defensive companies.Mainly because of its 3-year revenue growth and revenue growth, which are weaker than most Consumer Defensive peers.
- slower revenue growth over three years: weaker than 89% of peers. 3-year revenue growth: -6.0% vs peer median 3.7%
- slower revenue growth over the last year: weaker than 81% of peers. Revenue growth: -4.9% vs peer median 2.8%
- Still loss-making, but the loss per share narrowed. Earnings per share growth: — vs peer median 1.5%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = BGS, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | BGS | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 813 reported | -4.9% | 2.8% | 19% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 595 reported | Not reported | 1.4% | — | — | 33% |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 801 reported | -6.0% | 3.7% | 11% | 33% |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around BGS| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 945M EUR (≈$1.0B) | 100 | 60 | |
| 1 | 30.7B BRL (≈$5.5B) | 100 | 76 | |
| 1 | 5.5B USD | 100 | 84 | |
| 4 | 82.5B JPY (≈$561M) | 99 | 69 | |
| 4 | 2.4B CNY (≈$329M) | 99 | 29 | |
| 642 | 12.2B TWD (≈$378M) | 20 | 18 | |
| 642 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score