Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Nomad Foods Limited
How Nomad Foods Limited stacks up
NOMD · against 149 other Consumer Defensive companies listed in US-listed
Valuation
81/ 100
Near the top of its peers.
Ranked #15 of 150 · scores higher than 90% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score9 peers with a valuation score of 80–89, including NOMD · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 81?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Defensive companies.Mainly thanks to its free cash flow yield, earnings yield and EBITDA yield, which are stronger than most Consumer Defensive peers.
- more operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: stronger than 73% of peers. EBITDA yield: 13.0% vs peer median 8.6%
- higher earnings for the price paid: stronger than 80% of peers. Earnings yield: 9.0% vs peer median 4.4%
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 87% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 16.5% vs peer median 6.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = NOMD, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | NOMD | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 146 reported | 8.2% | 3.6% | 87% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 151 reported | 13.0% | 9.0% | 79% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 132 reported | 17.0% | 5.4% | 94% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 145 reported | 168.5% | 39.3% | 94% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around NOMD| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 898M USD | 97 | 84 | |
| 2 | 775M USD | 95 | 89 | |
| 3 | 181M USD | 93 | 73 | |
| 3 | 1.7B USD | 93 | 86 | |
| 5 | 1.5B USD | 91 | 51 | |
| 12 | 256M USD | 84 | 42 | |
| 13 |
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