Loading…
← CockpitCompetitor Analysis › PBH.TO Premium Brands Holdings CorporationOpen in the cockpit ↗

Premium Brands Holdings CorporationPBH.TOCompetitor analysis, valuation and peers

Canada · CAD·Consumer Staples›Food Distributors

Canadian holding company owning specialty food manufacturing and premium food distribution businesses across North America.

≈ A specialty food manufacturing/distribution holding company like a smaller Hormel FoodsMomentum neutral 44
Mkt cap
$2.86B
US dollars, full cap
Free float
95%
of shares outstanding
$/day
$13.6M
20-day average traded
Fwd P/E
12.2×
forward earnings
ROIC−WACC
-0.7 pp
WACC 6.2%
Hurdle
-6 pp
Req g minus delivered
Next earnings
125 days
11 Mar 2027
Close · CADC$76.97
1D+2.9%
1W+5.5%
1M+9.4%
3M-8.2%
6M-13.1%
YTD-24.3%
1Y-19.0%
ATR %2.4%
52w lowhigh27.9% off high

What Premium Brands does

Canadian holding company owning specialty food manufacturing and premium food distribution businesses across North America.

Buys and runs a collection of specialty food makers and distributors as largely separate operating businesses, so it grows by acquisition and by expanding plant capacity, selling to grocers and restaurants. It is based in British Columbia.

In one line: A specialty food manufacturing/distribution holding company like a smaller Hormel Foods.

Products and services

  • Specialty/branded food manufacturing
  • Food distribution

Customers

  • Grocery retailers
  • Foodservice/restaurant customers

Where it sits in the supply chain

  • Food manufacturing/distribution
  • Specialty food manufacturing (branded)
  • Premium food distribution

What could go right

  • Specialty/premium food demand growth
  • Acquisition-led brand portfolio growth

What could go wrong

  • Input cost (protein/commodity) inflation
  • Integration risk from frequent acquisitions

Moat: narrow (brand, scale, distribution). Portfolio of niche branded food manufacturers plus a broad distribution network give diversification and scale.

Headquarters: Richmond, Canada · Founded: 1917 · Employees: 12,036

Named competitors

Premium Brands at a glance

Size Premium Brands (PBH.TO) is a Canada Consumer Staples company (Food Distributors) with a market value of $2.86B, the 163rd largest of 420 Canada companies the cockpit tracks. Shares closed at C$76.97 on 6 Nov 2026.

Performance Over six months the shares fell 13.1%, against -6.7% for the median peer and +5.2% for the Canada market (cap-weighted) — 6th lowest of 12 in its peer set.

Growth Revenue grew 20.4% over the last twelve months (peer median +4.6%); the operating margin is 5.4% (peer median 4.3%).

Valuation It trades at 12.2× forward earnings against a peer median of 15.4× (3rd cheapest of 10).

Price implies For today's price to make sense, revenue must grow about 7% a year for seven years (Req g). Recent delivered growth is +13%, so the hurdle is -6 pp: the price already allows for a slowdown.

Capital Return on invested capital runs 0.7 points below its cost of capital (6.2% WACC).

Next results Next results expected around 11 Mar 2027 (exchange calendar; dates can move).

Relative performance

809010011 May 202611 Aug 20266 Nov 2026Peer median 92PBH.TO 86
Six months, rebased to 100: Premium Brands against the median of its 11 peers (local-currency closes).

Premium Brands financials

Reported figures in CAD; fiscal year ends 2025-12-31. TTM = trailing twelve months.
TTMFY2025FY2024FY2023FY2022
RevenueC$8.31BC$7.48BC$6.47BC$6.26BC$6.03B
Revenue growth—+16%+3%+4%—
Gross profitC$1.28BC$1.18BC$1.11BC$1.05BC$943M
EBITDAC$687MC$606MC$564MC$498MC$442M
Net incomeC$83.8MC$40.5MC$122MC$94.2MC$160M
Free cash flowC$14.9M-C$125M-C$112MC$34.2M-C$132M
Capital expenditureC$214MC$219MC$365MC$400MC$228M
Total debtC$3.63BC$3.42BC$3.20BC$2.65BC$2.58B

Quarterly statements and history in the cockpit →

Premium Brands competitor charts

The default views of Competitor Analysis ▸ Charts, drawn from the same data. Open them in the cockpit to change the axes, pin companies and read every value.

Performance: 6-month against 1-month return

-25%0%+25%+50%0%+20%+40%UNFIMTSMFICHEF9869DOLE1768002695YNGAAGCCDNUTPBH.TO6-month return →1-month return →
Up and to the right = strong over both horizons. Premium Brands is the large dot.

Fundamentals: revenue growth against valuation

-20%0%+20%+40%+60%20×40×UNFIMTSMFICHEFDOLE1768002695YNGADNUTPBH.TORevenue growth (TTM) →Forward P/E →
Further right = faster growth; higher = more expensive. The dashed lines are the peer medians. Premium Brands is the large dot.

Capital: growth delivered against growth the price implies

0%+50%+100%+150%0%50%100%150%UNFIMTSCHEF98691768002695YNGADNUTPBH.TOGrowth delivered (Del g) →Growth the price implies (Req g, 7 yrs) →
Above the diagonal = the price needs more growth than the company has been delivering; below = the price already allows for a slowdown. Premium Brands is the large dot.

Premium Brands competitors and peer comparison

Head to head with its named competitors (PBH.TO vs MFI.TO vs HRL vs CAG)
CompanyMarket cap6M returnRevenue growthOp. marginForward P/EReq g
Premium Brands PBH.TO$2.86B-13%+20%5%12.2×7.4%
Maple Leaf Foods MFI.TO$2.39B-13%-17%8%16.1×2.4%
Hormel Foods HRL$12.1B+7%+1%7%14.4×0.9%
Conagra Brands CAG$7.28B+8%-2%11%10.6×-4.9%

How Premium Brands compares with its peers

Peer set: Industry: the same industry and sector in any market, nearest in size. This is the same default set the interactive Competitor Analysis opens with.

Premium Brands against its 11 peers (data as of 6 Nov 2026)
MeasurePBH.TOPeer medianRank in peer set
1-month return+9.4%+2.8%5th highest of 12
6-month return-13.1%-6.7%6th lowest of 12
Distance from 52-week high-27.9%-16.2%3rd lowest of 12
Revenue growth (TTM)+20.4%+4.6%3rd highest of 12
Operating margin5.4%4.3%5th highest of 12
Forward P/E12.2×15.4×3rd cheapest of 10
Growth the price implies (Req g, 7 yrs)7.4%7.7%6th least demanding of 11
Growth delivered (Del g)+12.9%+5.1%5th highest of 11
Hurdle (Req g minus delivered)-5.5 pp-5.3 pp6th least demanding of 11
ROIC minus cost of capital-0.7 pp-0.4 pp5th lowest of 11
EV / EBITDA11.1×11.7×3rd cheapest of 6
Net debt / EBITDA5.3×2.3×2nd most indebted of 11

Peer table

Peer set: Industry: the same industry and sector in any market, nearest in size
CompanyMarketMarket cap6M returnRevenue growthOp. marginForward P/EReq gDelivered g
Premium Brands PBH.TOCanada$2.86B-13%+20%5%12.2×7.4%+12.9%
United Natural Foods UNFIUnited States$2.73B-13%-2%1%13.6×6.5%+2.9%
Metcash MTS.AXAustralia$2.55B+12%0%3%14.1×0.9%+3.9%
Maple Leaf Foods MFI.TOCanada$2.39B-13%-17%8%16.1×2.4%-1.9%
Chefs' Warehouse CHEFUnited States$4.51B+27%+12%4%36.3×22.6%+30.1%
Kato Sangyo 9869.TJapan$1.35B+10%+2%1%n/a-9.5%+1.9%
Dole DOLEUnited States$1.31B-7%+8%2%10.6×4.1%+16.1%
Busy Ming 1768.HKHong Kong$8.31B-36%+68%5%11.3×16.0%+143.4%
Jiangxi Huangshanghuang Group Food 002695.SZChina$880M-14%+17%7%39.9×14.7%-7.1%
Young & Co.'s Brewery, P.L.C YNGA.LUnited Kingdom$822M+52%+5%14%15.4×9.0%+42.0%
Agencia Comercial Spirits AGCCUnited States$804M-24%+145%13%n/an/an/a
Krispy Kreme DNUTUnited States$723M+16%-5%0%50.0×23.2%+6.3%

Questions

Who are Premium Brands's main competitors?
Named competitors: Maple Leaf Foods (MFI.TO), Hormel Foods (HRL), Conagra Brands (CAG). The cockpit's measured peer set (industry) also includes United Natural Foods (UNFI), Metcash (MTS.AX), Maple Leaf Foods (MFI.TO), Chefs' Warehouse (CHEF), Kato Sangyo (9869.T), Dole (DOLE).
Is Premium Brands expensive compared with its peers?
On forward p/e it trades at 12.2× against a peer median of 15.4×, 3rd cheapest of 10 in its peer set. For today's price to make sense, revenue must grow about 7% a year for seven years (Req g). Recent delivered growth is +13%, so the hurdle is -6 pp: the price already allows for a slowdown.
How has Premium Brands stock performed?
Over six months to 6 Nov 2026 the shares returned -13.1% against -6.7% for the median peer; over one year -19.0%.

How these numbers are made. Returns are close-to-close in local currency. Revenue growth and margins are trailing twelve months. Req g is the revenue growth that today's enterprise value requires for seven years at the company's own cost of capital; Delivered g is what it actually grew; the gap is the hurdle (honest precision about ±8 points, so read the ranking more than the decimal). No fair values, price targets or analyst ratings are shown, by design. Method and validation.