Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Central Garden & Pet Company
How Central Garden & Pet Company stacks up
CENT · against 174 other Consumer Defensive companies of similar size
Valuation
68/ 100
Above the middle of the pack.
Ranked #56 of 175 · scores higher than 68% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score19 peers with a valuation score of 60–69, including CENT · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 68?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Defensive companies.Mainly thanks to its free cash flow yield and earnings yield, which are stronger than most Consumer Defensive peers.
- EBITDA yield is close to the peer norm. EBITDA yield: 10.9% vs peer median 8.7%
- higher earnings for the price paid: stronger than 64% of peers. Earnings yield: 5.8% vs peer median 4.5%
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 77% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 12.0% vs peer median 6.2%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = CENT, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | CENT | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 170 reported | 5.8% | 5.0% | 66% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 175 reported | 10.2% | 9.6% | 59% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 64 reported | 11.9% | 7.3% | 79% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 165 reported | 60.2% | 50.0% | 65% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around CENT| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 29.73T IDR (≈$1.8B) | 98 | 60 | |
| 2 | 34.8B HKD (≈$4.5B) | 96 | 75 | |
| 2 | 57.07T IDR (≈$3.5B) | 96 | 75 | |
| 4 | 24.2B HKD (≈$3.1B) | 95 | 64 | |
| 5 | 2.33T KRW (≈$1.7B) | 94 | 66 | |
| 53 | 31.5B CNY (≈$4.4B) | 69 | 75 | |
| 53 | 265.7B JPY (≈$1.8B) | 69 | 76 | |
| 53 | 29.2B CNY (≈$4.1B) | 69 | 73 | |
| 56 | 45.2B SEK (≈$4.5B) | 68 | 60 | |
| 56 | 2.9B USD | 68 | 57 | |
| 58 | 3.6B AUD (≈$2.4B) | 67 | 42 | |
| 59 | 21.5B DKK (≈$3.2B) | 66 | 60 | |
| 59 | 1.8B USD | 66 | 55 | |
| 61 | 1.90T CLP (≈$2.1B) | 65 | 46 |
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