John B. Sanfilippo & Son vs J&J Snack Foods
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put John B. Sanfilippo & Son and J&J Snack Foods side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- J&J Snack Foods is the larger business, with $1.6B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $1.2B for John B. Sanfilippo & Son.
- John B. Sanfilippo & Son grew revenue faster (6.2%, against 0.5%).
- John B. Sanfilippo & Son kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (7.6% operating margin, against 5.3%).
- J&J Snack Foods turned more of its sales into free cash flow (5.2% FCF margin, against 3.0%).
- John B. Sanfilippo & Son earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (16.6%, against 7.3%).
Who comes out ahead
Of the 11 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
John B. Sanfilippo & Son
JBSS
6/11
Revenue growthOperating marginNet marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityShare count change
J&J Snack Foods
JJSF
5/11
5-year growthGross marginFCF marginPiotroski F-scoreNet debt / EBITDA
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | JBSS FY26 | JJSF FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $791M | $1.6B |
| Revenue | $1.2B | $1.6B |
| Free cash flow | $35.8M | $82.3M |
| Net income | $61.9M | $65.6M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 6.2% | 0.5% |
| 5-year growth | 6.5% | 9.2% |
| Share count change | 0.5% | 0.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 18.0% | 29.7% |
| Operating margin | 7.6% | 5.3% |
| Net margin | 5.3% | 4.1% |
| FCF margin | 3.0% | 5.2% |
| Return on capital | 16.6% | 7.3% |
| Return on equity | 16.7% | 6.8% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $48.5M | −$104M |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.4x | −0.7x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $46.8M | $68.8M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | — | 32.1x |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 4 |
Ten years
Revenue
Operating margin
Free cash flow
Return on capital
Each company's latest fiscal year; fiscal years end in different months. The best value in each row is highlighted where higher (or lower) is clearly better. Not investment advice.