Food Distributor Valuations – December 2022

Other than 2020, the valuations of publicly-traded food distributors increased over the last five fiscal years and through the end of 2022. The industry was adversely impacted in 2020 by reduced consumer demand in the food service, hospitality, and travel sectors. Much of the growth in 2021 and 2022 coincided with lighter pandemic-related restrictions and strong consumer spending. This article will examine some of the factors that appeared to have impacted the valuations of publicly-traded food distributors.

Important notes: This article examines potential driving factors for publicly-traded food distributor valuations from a financial statement perspective. An actual business valuation requires an in-depth analysis of the business operations and associated risk factors that are only sometimes evident from the data on financial statements. Also, this article will focus on what is typically perceived as primary value drivers to keep the length manageable. It will only touch on some observations in the data. Check out What is Value? and Risk and Return in the Market Approach for a quick read on the basics of risk and return and how they apply to this article.

The industry constituents for this analysis are listed below. HF Foods Group Inc. was removed from the food distributor group for this analysis as it was delinquent in its filings with the Securities and Exchange Committee (SEC) for its fiscal 2021 and 2022 quarterly reporting periods. The effective date of this analysis is December 29, 2022.

List of constituents analyzed in this article

Figure 1 summarizes three items for the food distributors:

  • Market value of invested capital (“MVIC”) calculated as the sum of market capitalization and interest-bearing debt;
  • Median revenues; and
  • Median earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (“EBITDA”).

The latest fiscal year is notated “LFY” (2021), while the latest 12 months is labeled “LTM” (latest available information as of December 29, 2022).

Trend of historical market value of invested capital, revenue, and EBITDA

Valuations generally increased over the last five fiscal years, outpacing improvements in financial performance overall. Valuations continued to grow in the LTM period, despite a broad deterioration in economic outlook and market conditions.

As was noted in our prior analysis of this industry, much of the improvement in 2021 occurred as COVID restrictions lifted and consumer spending continued to rise. However, as 2022 progressed, supply chain disruptions, inflation, food shortages, and high demand created difficulties for companies in the broad food and food service industries. These disruptions caused operators along the supply chain to overcompensate with inventory purchases in 2022.  As demand cooled and transportation challenges resolved toward the year’s end, companies were left with excess inventory. These dynamics have drawn into question the adequacy of the just-in-time inventory management model that has largely dominated the food industry.

With the recent disruptions in the industry, food distributors may look to evolve through technology. Some of these developments may include investments in supply chain and order management systems to improve efficiency and transparency, warehouse management and automation solutions, and improvements in data analytics and the use of artificial intelligence to anticipate potential disruptions in the supply chain and changing demand.

Valuation Multiples

Figures 2 and 3 provide a view of the historical trend in valuation multiples (revenue and EBITDA).

Trend of historical median revenue multiples
Trend of historical median EBITDA multiples

Revenue multiples increased over the last several years to 2020 and then declined in 2021 and 2022. EBITDA multiples were stable from 2019 to 2021 but fell in 2022. We will explore the various factors that appear to be impacting valuation multiples in the industry.

The Growth Story

Growth often has a strong influence on how companies are valued. Figures 4 and 5 below present a summary of the consensus forecasts for each group. Note that “NFY” means next fiscal year; NFY (blue line) = calendar 2022 for most companies, and NFY (orange line) = calendar 2021 for most companies. “Current year” means December 2022, while “prior year” means December 2021.

Comparison of historical and projected revenue growth: prior year vs. current year
Comparison of historical and projected EBITDA growth: prior year vs. current year

The orange line in Figures 4 and 5 represents data as of December 2021. At that time, the industry expected substantial revenue and EBITDA growth through 2023. Actual results for 2021 (as seen in the blue line) were generally in line with those expectations. However, growth expectations for 2022 and 2023 are lower than previously projected.

We looked to identify meaningful relationships between growth and observed revenue and EBITDA multiples. Companies with more robust projected growth rates generally traded at higher valuation multiples. Figures 6 and 7 present this relationship.

Chart plotting revenue multiples against projected revenue growth rates
Chart plotting EBITDA multiples against projected EBITDA growth rates

Figures 6 and 7 show that the lowest valuation multiples are associated with the lowest projected growth rates. However, there is some dispersion in the data (not to mention a generally limited number of data points to analyze), so concluding a definitive relationship is challenging.

See also: Need to prepare financial statement projections? See A Practical Guide to Financial Statement Forecasts for Business Valuations.

The Size Story

Larger companies are generally perceived to have lower levels of risk relative to smaller companies. This dynamic can be due to several factors, including improved product or geographic diversification, deeper management teams, access to various distribution channels, and better availability of capital.

Figure 8 presents each company’s market capitalizations plotted against its respective LTM revenue multiple.

Chart plotting revenue multiples against market capitalization

Based on Figure 8, size did not appear to have a measurable impact on valuation multiples.

The Profitability Story

Revenue multiples are typically heavily influenced by profitability. We usually observe higher revenue multiples in companies with higher levels of profitability. In this case, NFY revenue multiples appeared correlated with projected margins. Figure 9 presents this relationship.

Chart plotting revenue multiples against EBITDA margins

The relationship between profitability and revenue multiples sticks for most of the companies.

The Leverage Story

Debt usage tends to increase financial risk to equity holders. Debt holders have a senior position within a company’s capital structure, and debt servicing occurs before any cash flow benefits (i.e., dividends) are issued to equity holders. Figure 10 plots NFY EBITDA multiples against their associated debt-to-total capital ratios.

Chart plotting revenue multiples against debt-to-capital ratios

Figure 10 indicates some correlation between EBITDA multiples and financial leverage.

Tying it All Together

The trends observed in this article suggest that investors are considering multiple factors and that no single consideration is measurably impacting valuations. A summary of the observations in this article is presented below and compared to our analysis as of December 2021.

Summary of how the various factors analyzed in this article were observed to impact valuation multiples

Growth, profitability, and financial leverage all seemed to impact valuation multiples for food distributors as of the end of 2022.

I hope this analysis is helpful to you. Any input, feedback, suggestions, and questions (including disagreements with my high-level analysis) are welcome! Thanks for reading.