COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
JBS vs NOMD
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. JBS scored 72.0, NOMD scored 45.4 — JBS leads.
Compare another set
JBS
JBS N.V.
72
$13.82 · $14.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
26.6
JBS leads
NOMD
Nomad Foods Limited
45.4
$11.54 · $1.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestNOMD11.4x
- Fastest growthJBS+11.7%
- Strongest balance sheetNOMD0.92
- Highest qualityJBS69 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueNOMD-71%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
JBS
stronger →← stronger
NOMD
69
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
56
69
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
44
87
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
44
JBS is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
JBS
NOMD
$833mC+
FCF
$275mC
+11.7%B
Rev
-2.2%D+
2.83D
D/E
0.92B
12.9xA-
P/E
11.4xA
0.44A
PEG
2.79C
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
JBS
NOMD
24% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
71% below
~8%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-24%/yr
+0%
1-yr DCF upside
+241%
+32%
5-yr DCF upside
+246%
+97%
10-yr DCF upside
+253%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
JBS
Why this score
- Short track record
NOMD
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Foreign reporter (EUR)
The companies
JBSJBS N.V.
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $14.8b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $18.65 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.44 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $18.03 (implying +30% upside).
Moat
ROE 23% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
D/E 2.83 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Dividend payout 93% of earnings on a 9.8% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut. Net margin 2.6% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
NOMDNomad Foods Limited
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $1.6b. Down 27% from 52-week high of $15.91 — deep drawdown territory. 5 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $13.64 (implying +18% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 191% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Net margin 4.5% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 5% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where JBS and NOMD diverge
On the headline score the gap is 26.6 points in favor of JBS. The widest single difference is Value, where JBS leads by 42.9 points.
- ValueJBS 87.0 · NOMD 44.1JBS +42.9
- GrowthJBS 69.0 · NOMD 44.5JBS +24.5
- QualityJBS 69.3 · NOMD 55.7JBS +13.6
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.