Golden Growers Cooperative's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Golden Growers Cooperative (GGROU) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Golden Growers Cooperative vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 59M vs 136,327M combined for tracked competitors (0.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is holding steady (+1.2% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+14.2%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Golden Growers Cooperative generated -8.4% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2026, vs 11.5% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 9.9% net margin compares with 4.4% for the peer group.
- Scale: Golden Growers Cooperative ranks #23 of 45 companies by market capitalization in the Agricultural Production industry, holding 0.0% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Golden Growers Cooperative accounted for 0.0% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 0.1% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $58.73M compares with $1.88M for the peer group (31.2x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
GGROU Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Golden Growers Cooperative reported revenue contraction of 8.38 % year on year in Q2 2026, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 11.51 %.
With a net margin of 9.93 %, Golden Growers Cooperative achieved higher profitability than its competitors (4.43 %).
Golden Growers Cooperative generated 0.04 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 0.05 % a year earlier.
Golden Growers Cooperative vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net income growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Golden Growers Cooperative and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Golden Growers Cooperative | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (7) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (3) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Golden Growers Cooperative's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Agricultural Production industry grew revenue 16.8% year over year, combined, vs -8.4% for Golden Growers Cooperative. Golden Growers Cooperative's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.02% to 0.01%, a gain of 0.00 percentage points.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Golden Growers Cooperative | Yes | No | No | No |
| Competitors combined (5) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (8) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 87.50 % (7 of 8) | 37.50 % (3 of 8) | 12.50 % (1 of 8) | 37.50 % (3 of 8) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
GGROU Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
GGROU Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
GGROU Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Darling Ingredients Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Bunge Global Sa | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Archer daniels midland Co | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Seaboard Corporation | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Chs Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Golden Growers Cooperative's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Publicly Traded Peers of Golden Growers Cooperative
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Golden Growers Cooperative | 77.45 | 58.73 |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 38,984.30 | 82,099.00 |
| Bunge Global Sa | 21,346.72 | 80,547.00 |
| Darling Ingredients Inc | 9,732.39 | 6,548.66 |
| Seaboard Corporation | 3,937.26 | 10,272.00 |
| Chs Inc | - | 37,407.04 |
| SUBTOTAL | 74,078.12 | 216,932.44 |
Sources: Golden Growers Cooperative's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Golden Growers Cooperative versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| ProGold | Named by the company | 85% |
| Cargill | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Golden Growers Cooperative's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Archer daniels midland Co | Ag Services and Oilseeds 76.86 % |
| Bunge Global Sa | Soybean Processing and Refining 60.69 % |
| Darling Ingredients Inc | Feed Ingredients 66.67 % |
| Seaboard Corporation | Commodity Trading and Milling 53.08 % |
| Chs Inc | Grains 48.90 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Golden Growers Cooperative's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Golden Growers Cooperative | 77 | 58,734,000 | 5,871,000 |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 38,984 | 1,978,480 | 42,872 |
| Bunge Global Sa | 21,347 | 2,369,029 | 21,000 |
| Darling Ingredients Inc | 9,732 | 436,578 | 40,417 |
| Seaboard Corporation | 3,937 | 733,714 | 45,643 |
| Chs Inc | - | 3,501,548 | 54,057 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 74,001 | 1,882,927 | 37,470 |
Golden Growers Cooperative's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Darling Ingredients Inc | North America 58.21 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 39 companies in Golden Growers Cooperative's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Golden Growers Cooperative ranks #23 of 39 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 0.05 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 1,571, indicating a moderately concentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Archer daniels midland Co | 39,540 | 25.42 % |
| 2 | Nutrien Ltd | 35,003 | 22.51 % |
| 3 | Bunge Global Sa | 21,394 | 13.76 % |
| 4 | Cf Industries Holdings inc | 18,057 | 11.61 % |
| 5 | Darling Ingredients Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Mosaic Co | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Icl Group Ltd | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Seaboard Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Scotts Miracle gro Co | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Andersons Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 23 | Golden Growers Cooperative | 77 | 0.05 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Golden Growers Cooperative's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-25.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18 | Brasilagro Brazilian Agricultural Real Estate Company | 347 | -9.35 % |
| 19 | Cea Industries Inc | 312 | -23.28 % |
| 20 | Alico Inc | 291 | 16.66 % |
| 21 | Limoneira Company | 213 | -21.02 % |
| 22 | Cibus Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 23 | Golden Growers Cooperative | 77 | - |
| 24 | American Vanguard Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 25 | Rythm Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 26 | Local Bounti Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 27 | Bioceres Crop Solutions Corp | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 28 | Cavitation Technologies Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Golden Growers Cooperative's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-28. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Agricultural Production industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (58 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | -0.02 % | 21.12 % (avg) | -21.1 pp |
| Operating Margin | 9.67 % | industry median | +7.9 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | - | 2.16 % (avg) | - |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 0.00 % | 4.73 % (avg) | -4.7 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 0.42 % | 8.37 % | -6.88 % | 77.14 % | 19.92 % | -18.05 % | -29.56 % | 0.45 % |
| Operating Margin | 12.65 % | 12.99 % | 10.67 % | 8.81 % | 5.75 % | 5.92 % | 9.03 % | 9.28 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 8.44 % | 9.24 % | 7.10 % | 10.06 % | - | 20.02 % | 18.32 % | 28.17 % |
| P/E | 8.0x | 5.6x | - | - | - | 12.8x | 11.0x | 12.8x |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Strategic Group Map
Every company in Golden Growers Cooperative's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Golden Growers Cooperative is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
Golden Growers Cooperative's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Golden Growers Cooperative's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) a common framework, not a precision instrument.
Golden Growers Cooperative falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.00x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 4.2% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | Moderate | Industry HHI of 1,571 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 0.00 % vs industry average 4.73 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Golden Growers Cooperative's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Golden Growers Cooperative's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Golden Growers Cooperative falls in the Low attractiveness / Low strength cell: Harvest / Divest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Golden Growers Cooperative's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Operating margin 7.9 points above the industry median.
Weaknesses
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.00x).
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
No rule matched.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Golden Growers Cooperative | 1.02 | 5.30 | - |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 0.47 | 1.36 | 0.36 |
| Bunge Global Sa | 0.17 | 1.70 | 0.87 |
| Darling Ingredients Inc | 0.13 | 1.54 | 1.01 |
| Seaboard Corporation | 0.10 | 2.63 | 0.29 |
| Chs Inc | 0.07 | 1.49 | 0.23 |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Golden Growers Cooperative | Q2 2026 | -8.4 % | -1.0 % |
| Archer daniels midland Co | Q2 2026 | +7.2 % | +320.3 % |
| Bunge Global Sa | Q1 2026 | +87.8 % | -63.2 % |
| Darling Ingredients Inc | Q2 2026 | +16.4 % | +2,628.8 % |
| Seaboard Corporation | Q2 2026 | +17.8 % | +48.1 % |
| Chs Inc | Q2 2026 | +18.6 % | +15.5 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +30.6 % | +132.9 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Golden Growers Cooperative's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Golden Growers Cooperative | Q2 2026 | -8.4 % | - |
| Archer daniels midland Co | Q2 2026 | +4.8 % | -10.8 % |
| Bunge Global Sa | Q1 2026 | +91.0 % | +8.4 % |
| Darling Ingredients Inc | Q2 2026 | +7.5 % | - |
| Seaboard Corporation | Q2 2026 | +16.5 % | -32.5 % |
| Chs Inc | Q2 2026 | +18.4 % | -29.9 % |
Golden Growers Cooperative's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Golden Growers Cooperative | 30.77% | 32.42% | 21.68% |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 3.33% | 5.61% | 7.77% |
| Bunge Global Sa | 1.68% | 2.67% | 4.47% |
| Darling Ingredients Inc | 5.72% | 5.72% | 12.23% |
| Seaboard Corporation | 7.67% | 9.00% | 12.13% |
| Chs Inc | 2.91% | 4.27% | 5.20% |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Golden Growers Cooperative's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Golden Growers Cooperative | 13.16 | 1.32 |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 22.03 | 0.47 |
| Bunge Global Sa | 24.96 | 0.27 |
| Darling Ingredients Inc | 16.29 | 1.49 |
| Seaboard Corporation | 6.23 | 0.38 |
| Chs Inc | - | - |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 17.14 | 0.34 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.