Seek Returns logo

ADM vs. MDLZ: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

Here’s a clear look at ADM and MDLZ, comparing key factors like historical performance, profitability, financial strength, growth, dividend, and valuation.

Company Profile

SymbolADMMDLZ
Company NameArcher-Daniels-Midland CompanyMondelez International, Inc.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorConsumer StaplesConsumer Staples
GICS IndustryFood ProductsFood Products
Market Capitalization29.18 billion USD81.74 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENasdaqGS
Listing DateMarch 17, 1980June 13, 2001
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of ADM and MDLZ by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each. Use the tabs to select the desired time period. Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

ADM vs. MDLZ: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolADMMDLZ
5-Day Price Return2.38%2.78%
13-Week Price Return21.44%-3.88%
26-Week Price Return32.86%3.29%
52-Week Price Return1.76%-10.89%
Month-to-Date Return12.09%-2.35%
Year-to-Date Return20.21%5.76%
10-Day Avg. Volume3.59M7.02M
3-Month Avg. Volume3.45M7.46M
3-Month Volatility26.43%21.74%
Beta0.700.47

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

ADM

4.96%

Food Products Industry

Max
27.15%
Q3
15.66%
Median
10.47%
Q1
7.82%
Min
-2.46%

ADM’s Return on Equity of 4.96% is in the lower quartile for the Food Products industry. This indicates a less efficient generation of profit from its equity base when compared to its competitors.

MDLZ

13.64%

Food Products Industry

Max
27.15%
Q3
15.66%
Median
10.47%
Q1
7.82%
Min
-2.46%

MDLZ’s Return on Equity of 13.64% is on par with the norm for the Food Products industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

ADM

1.33%

Food Products Industry

Max
18.44%
Q3
9.92%
Median
6.38%
Q1
4.13%
Min
-0.92%

Falling into the lower quartile for the Food Products industry, ADM’s Net Profit Margin of 1.33% indicates weaker profitability. This means the company retains a smaller portion of each dollar in sales as profit compared to its competitors.

MDLZ

9.81%

Food Products Industry

Max
18.44%
Q3
9.92%
Median
6.38%
Q1
4.13%
Min
-0.92%

MDLZ’s Net Profit Margin of 9.81% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Food Products industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

ADM

0.85%

Food Products Industry

Max
24.83%
Q3
14.27%
Median
9.73%
Q1
6.26%
Min
-0.10%

ADM’s Operating Profit Margin of 0.85% is in the lower quartile for the Food Products industry. This indicates weaker profitability from core operations, which may stem from inefficiencies or competitive pressures on pricing.

MDLZ

12.44%

Food Products Industry

Max
24.83%
Q3
14.27%
Median
9.73%
Q1
6.26%
Min
-0.10%

MDLZ’s Operating Profit Margin of 12.44% is around the midpoint for the Food Products industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolADMMDLZ
Return on Equity (TTM)4.96%13.64%
Return on Assets (TTM)2.08%5.19%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)1.33%9.81%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)0.85%12.44%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)6.37%32.55%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

ADM

1.42

Food Products Industry

Max
3.80
Q3
2.40
Median
1.61
Q1
1.28
Min
0.55

ADM’s Current Ratio of 1.42 aligns with the median group of the Food Products industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

MDLZ

0.64

Food Products Industry

Max
3.80
Q3
2.40
Median
1.61
Q1
1.28
Min
0.55

MDLZ’s Current Ratio of 0.64 falls into the lower quartile for the Food Products industry. This indicates a tighter liquidity situation and a more constrained capacity to handle short-term debt than many of its competitors.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

ADM

0.41

Food Products Industry

Max
1.87
Q3
0.90
Median
0.48
Q1
0.24
Min
0.00

ADM’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.41 is typical for the Food Products industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

MDLZ

0.80

Food Products Industry

Max
1.87
Q3
0.90
Median
0.48
Q1
0.24
Min
0.00

MDLZ’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.80 is typical for the Food Products industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

ADM

22.44

Food Products Industry

Max
70.39
Q3
32.08
Median
9.51
Q1
4.55
Min
-1.69

ADM’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 22.44 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Food Products industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

MDLZ

13.32

Food Products Industry

Max
70.39
Q3
32.08
Median
9.51
Q1
4.55
Min
-1.69

MDLZ’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 13.32 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Food Products industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolADMMDLZ
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.420.64
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.880.39
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.410.80
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)22.4413.32

Growth

Revenue Growth

ADM vs. MDLZ: A side-by-side comparison of their Revenue Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

EPS Growth

ADM vs. MDLZ: A side-by-side comparison of their EPS Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

Dividend

Dividend Yield (TTM)

ADM

3.37%

Food Products Industry

Max
7.43%
Q3
4.12%
Median
2.67%
Q1
1.57%
Min
0.00%

ADM’s Dividend Yield of 3.37% is consistent with its peers in the Food Products industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

MDLZ

2.96%

Food Products Industry

Max
7.43%
Q3
4.12%
Median
2.67%
Q1
1.57%
Min
0.00%

MDLZ’s Dividend Yield of 2.96% is consistent with its peers in the Food Products industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

ADM

88.90%

Food Products Industry

Max
202.50%
Q3
109.53%
Median
67.28%
Q1
39.33%
Min
0.00%

ADM’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 88.90% is within the typical range for the Food Products industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

MDLZ

66.77%

Food Products Industry

Max
202.50%
Q3
109.53%
Median
67.28%
Q1
39.33%
Min
0.00%

MDLZ’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 66.77% is within the typical range for the Food Products industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolADMMDLZ
Dividend Yield (TTM)3.37%2.96%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)88.90%66.77%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

ADM

26.37

Food Products Industry

Max
35.81
Q3
22.88
Median
17.13
Q1
13.91
Min
2.77

A P/E Ratio of 26.37 places ADM in the upper quartile for the Food Products industry. This high valuation relative to peers suggests the market holds elevated expectations for the company’s future growth.

MDLZ

22.54

Food Products Industry

Max
35.81
Q3
22.88
Median
17.13
Q1
13.91
Min
2.77

MDLZ’s P/E Ratio of 22.54 is within the middle range for the Food Products industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

ADM

0.35

Food Products Industry

Max
3.63
Q3
1.86
Median
1.14
Q1
0.68
Min
0.12

In the lower quartile for the Food Products industry, ADM’s P/S Ratio of 0.35 indicates its revenue is valued more conservatively than most of its peers. This could present a compelling opportunity if the market has overlooked its sales-generating capabilities.

MDLZ

2.21

Food Products Industry

Max
3.63
Q3
1.86
Median
1.14
Q1
0.68
Min
0.12

MDLZ’s P/S Ratio of 2.21 is in the upper echelon for the Food Products industry. This means the company is valued richly on its revenue stream compared to its peers, suggesting the stock is priced for a high level of future performance.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

ADM

1.13

Food Products Industry

Max
5.01
Q3
2.76
Median
1.98
Q1
1.26
Min
0.52

ADM’s P/B Ratio of 1.13 is in the lower quartile for the Food Products industry. From a value investing perspective, this is favorable, as it suggests the stock is trading at a discount to its net asset value and may offer a greater margin of safety.

MDLZ

3.33

Food Products Industry

Max
5.01
Q3
2.76
Median
1.98
Q1
1.26
Min
0.52

MDLZ’s P/B Ratio of 3.33 is in the upper tier for the Food Products industry. This indicates that investors are paying a premium relative to the company’s net assets, a valuation that hinges on its ability to generate superior profits.

ADM vs. MDLZ: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against the Food Products industry benchmark.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolADMMDLZ
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)26.3722.54
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)0.352.21
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)1.133.33
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)5.9028.69