GIS vs. CAG

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about General Mills, Inc. (GIS) and Conagra Brands, Inc. (CAG).

Performance

GIS vs. CAG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in General Mills, Inc. (GIS) and Conagra Brands, Inc. (CAG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GIS vs. CAG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GIS General Mills, Inc.	-18.85%	-23.75%	1.45%	-19.97%	28.09%	18.53%	13.60%	43.13%	-31.57%	-0.65%
CAG Conagra Brands, Inc.	-8.57%	-33.32%	1.46%	-22.82%	17.52%	-2.55%	8.69%	65.50%	-41.99%	-2.55%

Fundamentals

Market Cap GIS : $20.19B CAG : $7.43B
EPS GIS : $4.07 CAG : -$0.09
PS Ratio GIS : 1.10 CAG : 0.66
PB Ratio GIS : 2.16 CAG : 0.91
Total Revenue (TTM) GIS : $18.37B CAG : $11.18B
Gross Profit (TTM) GIS : $4.70B CAG : $2.70B
EBITDA (TTM) GIS : $3.03B CAG : $792.70M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GIS achieves a -18.85% return, which is significantly lower than CAG's -8.57% return. Over the past 10 years, GIS has outperformed CAG with an annualized return of -1.98%, while CAG has yielded a comparatively lower -4.55% annualized return.

GIS

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -17.53%
• YTD: -18.85%
• 6M: -24.64%
• 1Y: -34.57%
• 3Y*: -21.17%
• 5Y*: -6.10%
• 10Y*: -1.98%

CAG

• 1D: -1.27%
• 1M: -19.08%
• YTD: -8.57%
• 6M: -16.31%
• 1Y: -37.27%
• 3Y*: -21.30%
• 5Y*: -12.01%
• 10Y*: -4.55%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

GIS vs. CAG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

GIS

GIS Risk / Return Rank: 3
GIS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
GIS Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
GIS Omega Ratio Rank: 3
GIS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
GIS Martin Ratio Rank: 3

CAG

CAG Risk / Return Rank: 4
CAG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
CAG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
CAG Omega Ratio Rank: 4
CAG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
CAG Martin Ratio Rank: 11

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

GIS vs. CAG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for General Mills, Inc. (GIS) and Conagra Brands, Inc. (CAG). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	GIS	CAG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-1.46	-1.38	-0.08
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-2.13	-2.06	-0.07
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.75	0.77	-0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.91	-0.96	+0.04
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-1.84	-1.43	-0.41
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GIS vs. CAG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GIS Sharpe Ratio is -1.46, which is comparable to the CAG Sharpe Ratio of -1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GIS and CAG, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GIS	CAG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.46	-1.38	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.29	-0.53	+0.23
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.09	-0.18	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	0.26	+0.17

Correlation

The correlation between GIS and CAG is 0.44, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

GIS vs. CAG - Dividend Comparison

GIS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.53%, less than CAG's 9.02% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GIS General Mills, Inc.	6.53%	5.20%	3.73%	3.47%	2.50%	3.03%	3.37%	3.66%	5.03%	3.27%	3.01%	3.00%
CAG Conagra Brands, Inc.	9.02%	8.09%	5.05%	4.75%	3.32%	3.44%	2.52%	2.48%	3.98%	2.19%	29.36%	2.37%

Drawdowns

GIS vs. CAG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GIS drawdown since its inception was -55.55%, roughly equal to the maximum CAG drawdown of -56.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIS and CAG.

Drawdown Indicators

	GIS	CAG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.55%	-56.95%	+1.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-37.97%	-39.13%	+1.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-55.55%	-55.94%	+0.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-55.55%	-55.94%	+0.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-54.09%	-54.90%	+0.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.07%	-15.56%	+5.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.79%	26.14%	-7.35%

Volatility

GIS vs. CAG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for General Mills, Inc. (GIS) is 7.37%, while Conagra Brands, Inc. (CAG) has a volatility of 10.72%. This indicates that GIS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CAG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GIS	CAG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.37%	10.72%	-3.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.28%	21.38%	-3.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.76%	27.15%	-3.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.89%	22.93%	-2.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.97%	25.98%	-4.01%

Financials

GIS vs. CAG - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between General Mills, Inc. and Conagra Brands, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

GIS - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, General Mills, Inc. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 4.44B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.

CAG - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Conagra Brands, Inc. reported a gross profit of 657.70M and revenue of 2.79B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 23.6%.

GIS - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, General Mills, Inc. reported an operating income of 524.60M and revenue of 4.44B, resulting in an operating margin of 11.8%.

CAG - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Conagra Brands, Inc. reported an operating income of 280.10M and revenue of 2.79B, resulting in an operating margin of 10.1%.

GIS - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, General Mills, Inc. reported a net income of 303.10M and revenue of 4.44B, resulting in a net margin of 6.8%.

CAG - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Conagra Brands, Inc. reported a net income of 199.80M and revenue of 2.79B, resulting in a net margin of 7.2%.