Performance Food Group's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Performance Food Group (PFGC) 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: Performance Food Group vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 67,839M vs 187,548M combined for tracked competitors (26.6% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+6.3% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+3.6%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Performance Food Group generated 6.4% revenue growth year over year in Q4 2026, vs 4.8% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 0.9% net margin compares with -4.9% for the peer group.
- Scale: Performance Food Group ranks #3 of 19 companies by market capitalization in the Grocery Stores industry, holding 5.9% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Performance Food Group accounted for 27.1% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 26.8% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $1.54M compares with $0.44M for the peer group (3.5x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
PFGC Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2026
Performance Food Group reported revenue growth of 6.43 % year on year in Q4 2026, above its competitors' combined revenue growth of 4.80 %.
With a net margin of 0.90 %, Performance Food Group achieved higher profitability than its competitors (-4.88 %).
Performance Food Group generated 27.06 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 26.76 % a year earlier.
Performance Food Group vs. its Competitors, Q4 2026
Revenue 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 Performance Food Group and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (2) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (3) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Performance Food Group's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Grocery Stores industry grew revenue 4.1% year over year, combined, vs 6.4% for Performance Food Group. Performance Food Group's share of combined industry revenue moved from 12.90% to 13.18%, a gain of 0.29 percentage points.
Performance Food Group'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (12) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (7) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 87.50 % (7 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 87.50 % (7 of 8) | 12.50 % (1 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.
PFGC Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
PFGC Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
PFGC Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
PFGC 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 | Chefs Warehouse Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Aramark | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Us Foods Holding Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Spartannash Company | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | The J M Smucker Company | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Performance Food Group's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Performance Food Group's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
The foodservice distribution industry is highly competitive. Certain of our competitors have greater financial and other resources than we do. Furthermore, there are two larger broadline distributors with national footprints. In addition, there are numerous smaller regional, local, and specialty distributors. These smaller distributors often align themselves with other smaller distributors through purchasing cooperatives and marketing groups to enhance their geographic reach, private label offerings, overall purchasing power, cost efficiencies and to assemble delivery networks for national or multi-regional distribution. We often do not have exclusive service agreements with our customers and our customers may switch to other distributors if those distributors can offer lower prices, differentiated products, or customer service that is perceived to be superior. We believe that most purchasing decisions in the foodservice business are based on the quality and price of the product and a distributor’s ability to fill orders completely and accurately and to provide timely deliveries.
We believe we have a competitive advantage over smaller regional and local broadline
distributors through economies of scale in purchasing and procurement, which
allow us to offer a broad variety of products (including our proprietary Performance
Brands) at competitive prices to our customers. Our customers benefit from our
ability to provide them with extensive geographic coverage as they continue
to grow. We believe we also benefit from supply chain efficiency, including
a growing inbound logistics backhaul network that uses our collective distribution
network to deliver inbound products across business segments; best practices
in warehousing, transportation, and risk management; the ability to benefit
from the scale of our purchases of items not for resale, such as trucks, construction
materials, insurance, banking relationships, healthcare, and material handling
equipment; and the ability to optimize our networks so that customers are served
from the most efficient distribution centers, which minimizes the cost of delivery.
We believe these efficiencies and economies of scale will provide opportunities
for improvements in our operating margins when combined with incremental fixed-cost
advantage.
Publicly Traded Peers of Performance Food Group Company
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | 14,439.29 | 67,838.70 |
| Sysco Corporation | 37,761.70 | 84,553.00 |
| Us Foods Holding Corp | 20,712.12 | 40,133.00 |
| General Mills Inc | 18,073.44 | 18,296.60 |
| Aramark | 14,570.71 | 19,845.26 |
| The J M Smucker Company | 12,886.08 | 9,157.10 |
| SUBTOTAL | 131,462.28 | 269,337.56 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Performance Food Group Company.
Sources: Performance Food Group Company'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 Performance Food Group Company versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Performance Food Group's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Amcon Distributing Co | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Performance Food Group'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.
Performance Food Group'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 |
|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | Foodservice 54.00 % |
| Sysco Corporation | U.S. Foodservice Operations 69.37 % |
| Us Foods Holding Corp | Reportable 100.00 % |
| General Mills Inc | United States Meals and Baking Solutions Operating Unit 24.61 % |
| Aramark | Food and Support Services - United States 69.90 % |
| The J M Smucker Company | U.S. Retail Coffee 38.83 % |
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).
Sign in to see all peers for Performance Food Group Company.
Performance Food Group'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | 14,439 | 1,541,789 | 8,166 |
| Sysco Corporation | 37,762 | 1,127,373 | 23,427 |
| Us Foods Holding Corp | 20,712 | 1,337,767 | 24,267 |
| General Mills Inc | 18,073 | 609,887 | -29,703 |
| Aramark | 14,571 | 71,286 | 1,378 |
| The J M Smucker Company | 12,886 | 1,308,157 | 32,786 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 117,023 | 435,741 | 697 |
Sign in to see all peers for Performance Food Group Company.
Performance Food Group'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 |
|---|---|
| The J M Smucker Company | United States 94.68 % |
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.
Performance Food Group's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 17 companies in Performance Food Group's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Performance Food Group ranks #3 of 17 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 5.88 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 4,539, indicating a highly 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 | Publix Super Markets Inc | 159,747 | 65.00 % |
| 2 | Kroger Co | 39,097 | 15.91 % |
| 3 | Performance Food Group Company | 14,439 | 5.88 % |
| 4 | Albertsons Companies Inc | 6,326 | 2.57 % |
| 5 | Bbb Foods Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Sprouts Farmers Market Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Chefs Warehouse Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | United Natural Foods inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Weis Markets inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Ingles Markets Incorporated | 1,234 | 5.2% |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Performance Food Group's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-28.
Performance Food Group'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Publix Super Markets Inc | 159,747 | -1.37 % |
| 2 | Kroger Co | 39,097 | -9.93 % |
| 3 | Performance Food Group Company | 14,439 | -11.09 % |
| 4 | Albertsons Companies Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 5 | Bbb Foods Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 6 | Sprouts Farmers Market Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 7 | Chefs Warehouse Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 8 | United Natural Foods inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Performance Food Group'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.
Performance Food Group's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Grocery Stores industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (23 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 11.93 % | 24.79 % (avg) | -12.9 pp |
| Operating Margin | 1.31 % | industry median | -0.3 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 3.49 % | 3.13 % (avg) | +0.4 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | - | 2.34 % (avg) | - |
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.
Performance Food Group's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Grocery Stores industry average (23 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 45.2x | 28.0x | +17.1x |
| EV / EBITDA | 9.1x | 11.3x | -2.3x |
| P/B | 3.5x | 3.4x | +0.1x |
| Return on Equity | 7.70 % | industry aggregate | -24.70 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 4.31 % | 1.61 % (avg) | 2.70 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Performance Food Group'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 | 4.38 % | 26.52 % | 16.45 % | 48.99 % | 41.66 % | 2.81 % | 3.86 % | 9.42 % |
| Operating Margin | 1.53 % | 1.33 % | -0.55 % | 0.53 % | 0.99 % | 1.42 % | 1.35 % | 1.30 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 7.45 % | 6.25 % | -1.86 % | 2.04 % | 4.31 % | 5.85 % | 5.23 % | 4.27 % |
| P/E | 20.6x | 29.7x | - | 179.7x | 35.3x | 24.4x | 34.9x | 42.7x |
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.
Performance Food Group's Strategic Group Map
Every company in Performance Food Group's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Performance Food Group 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.
Performance Food Group's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Performance Food Group'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.
Performance Food Group falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.09x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 2.2% (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. A caveat worth reading alongside this chart: Publix Super Markets Inc alone holds 65% of this industry's market cap. In an industry this dominated by one leader, the framework will place nearly every OTHER company in "Dog" or "Question Mark" purely because relative share is measured against that leader, regardless of how strong those other companies actually are on their own fundamentals. Check the Profitability, Valuation and Financial Strength sections above before treating this quadrant label as a verdict.
Performance Food Group'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 | Low | Industry HHI of 4,539 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Performance Food Group's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Performance Food Group'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.
Performance Food Group'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.
Performance Food Group falls in the Medium attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Selective.
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.
Performance Food Group'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
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+6.3% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Return on equity 24.7 points below the industry aggregate.
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.09x).
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
- Industry dominated by Publix Super Markets Inc , holding 65.00 % of industry market cap.
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.
Performance Food Group'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | 0.01 | 1.57 | 1.13 |
| Sysco Corporation | 0.14 | 1.24 | 7.64 |
| Us Foods Holding Corp | 0.01 | 1.15 | 1.48 |
| General Mills Inc | 0.07 | 0.65 | 2.07 |
| Aramark | 0.17 | 1.11 | 2.25 |
| The J M Smucker Company | - | 0.83 | 1.24 |
Sign in to see all peers for Performance Food Group Company.
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.
Performance Food Group'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | Q2 2026 | +6.4 % | +23.4 % |
| Sysco Corporation | Q2 2026 | +4.7 % | +4.0 % |
| Us Foods Holding Corp | Q2 2026 | +4.5 % | +22.8 % |
| General Mills Inc | Q3 2026 | -2.8 % | -67.0 % |
| Aramark | Q2 2026 | +9.3 % | +36.0 % |
| The J M Smucker Company | Q2 2026 | +5.0 % | - |
| PEERS TOTAL | +4.9 % | -90.8 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Performance Food Group Company.
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Performance Food Group'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | Q2 2026 | +6.2 % | -31.8 % |
| Sysco Corporation | Q2 2026 | +4.9 % | -36.1 % |
| Us Foods Holding Corp | Q2 2026 | +3.7 % | -1.3 % |
| General Mills Inc | Q3 2026 | -2.8 % | -17.4 % |
| Aramark | Q2 2026 | +11.9 % | +0.9 % |
| The J M Smucker Company | Q2 2026 | -24.3 % | +4.9 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Performance Food Group Company.
Performance Food Group's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | 1.96% | 2.25% | 7.70% |
| Sysco Corporation | 6.38% | 9.68% | 79.32% |
| Us Foods Holding Corp | 5.16% | 6.18% | 16.75% |
| General Mills Inc | - | - | - |
| Aramark | 2.82% | 3.42% | 11.83% |
| The J M Smucker Company | 1.36% | 1.58% | 3.92% |
Sign in to see all peers for Performance Food Group Company.
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).
Performance Food Group's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Performance Food Group Company | 40.16 | 0.21 |
| Sysco Corporation | 21.47 | 0.45 |
| Us Foods Holding Corp | 29.02 | 0.52 |
| General Mills Inc | - | 0.99 |
| Aramark | 38.03 | 0.73 |
| The J M Smucker Company | 56.21 | 1.41 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 192.82 | 0.49 |
Sign in to see all peers for Performance Food Group Company.
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.