KMB vs PG Stock Comparison: AI Score, Valuation, Performance and Upside
Kimberly-Clark and Procter & Gamble are both established household products companies, but Kimberly-Clark concentrates more narrowly on tissue and diaper categories while Procter & Gamble spans a much broader portfolio across personal care, home care, and grooming.
Kimberly-Clark offers a more concentrated bet on tissue and hygiene category leadership, while Procter & Gamble offers broader diversification across multiple household and personal care categories. Consider whether you prefer Kimberly-Clark's focused category leadership or Procter & Gamble's diversified global scale.
PG holds the edge across 4 of 5 key metrics in this comparison. PG has delivered stronger 1-year price return (-7.42% vs -18.00%), though KMB has the better forward P/E setup (14.63x vs 19.43x for PG). PG leads on both revenue growth (1.50%) and operating margin (22.08%), suggesting a stronger fundamental setup on both dimensions. Analyst consensus implies meaningfully more upside for PG (+11.70%) than for KMB (+8.26%).
Human Wall Street analysts' price targets, typically implying a ~12-month view — a separate signal from this site's own AI Prediction Signal further down the page, which is a 5-/30-day machine-learning forecast based on price history alone.
- Want concentrated exposure to leading tissue and diaper category brands
- Believe presence across premium and value tiers supports resilient market share
- Value a long dividend growth history tied to consistent cash generation
- Are comfortable with pulp and fiber input cost volatility
- Want diversified exposure across personal care, home care, and grooming categories
- Believe global scale supports sustained investment in innovation and marketing
- Value a long history of dividend increases across economic cycles
- Are comfortable with input cost inflation as an ongoing margin consideration
| Metric | KMB | PG |
|---|---|---|
| AI scorei | 39.2 | 40.3 |
| AI ranki | #1139 | #1036 |
| Latest closei | $104.96 | $146.44 |
| 1M returni | -6.59% | -0.25% |
| 6M returni | +0.05% | -4.90% |
| 1Y returni | -18.00% | -7.42% |
How much would $10,000 be worth today if invested at the start of each period, with all dividends reinvested?
| Period | KMB | PG |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y ago | $8.13K (-18.7%) started 2025-09-04 | $9.2K (-8.0%) started 2025-09-04 |
| 5Y ago | $9.9K (-1.0%) started 2021-09-07 | $12.34K (+23.4%) started 2021-09-07 |
| 10Y ago | $15.35K (+53.5%) started 2016-09-06 | $27.34K (+173.4%) started 2016-09-06 |
Hypothetical — past performance does not guarantee future results.
| Metric | KMB | PG |
|---|---|---|
| Market capi | $36.43B | $334.21B |
| Trailing P/Ei | 21.65 | 21.75 |
| Forward P/Ei | 14.63 | 19.43 |
| Price/Salesi | 2.24 | 4.58 |
| EV/Revenuei | 2.54 | 4.14 |
| Analyst targeti | $118.60 | $160.61 |
| Target upsidei | +8.26% | +11.70% |
| Metric | KMB | PG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthi | 0.60% | 1.50% |
| Earnings growthi | -32.30% | -15.50% |
| EPS growthi | -32.30% | -15.50% |
| FCF margini | +5.68% | +15.26% |
| Operating margini | 19.00% | 22.08% |
| Profit margini | 11.79% | 18.44% |
| ROIC proxyi | 104.91% | 30.29% |
| Return on equityi | 104.91% | 30.29% |
| Dividend yieldi | 4.67% | 3.03% |
| Betai | 0.28 | 0.38 |
| Debt/equityi | 348.93 | 64.49 |
| Current ratioi | 0.91 | 0.68 |
| Quick ratioi | 0.40 | 0.41 |
Over the past year, KMB and PG have moved moderately in the same direction (correlation of 0.54), based on daily returns.
Lower drawdown and smaller single-period drops generally indicate a smoother ride, though they do not guarantee lower future risk.
| Period | Metric | KMB | PG |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Y | Growthi | -18.74% | -8.01% |
| CAGRi | -18.77% | -8.02% | |
| Volatilityi | 27.14% | 19.48% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | -0.79 | -0.56 | |
| Sortino ratioi | -0.97 | -0.79 | |
| Max drawdowni | 28.95% | 16.15% | |
| Current drawdowni | 19.86% | 12.42% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 18.69% | 9.39% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 19.87% | 10.32% | |
| Max daily dropi | 14.57% | 3.56% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 16.59% | 8.12% | |
| 5Y | Growthi | -14.17% | +11.95% |
| CAGRi | -3.02% | +2.29% | |
| Volatilityi | 20.78% | 18.09% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | -0.26 | -0.03 | |
| Sortino ratioi | -0.34 | -0.04 | |
| Max drawdowni | 36.87% | 23.77% | |
| Current drawdowni | 28.79% | 17.50% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 11.98% | 8.17% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 15.28% | 10.25% | |
| Max daily dropi | 14.57% | 6.23% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 16.59% | 8.92% | |
| 10Y | Growthi | +9.08% | +109.30% |
| CAGRi | +0.87% | +7.67% | |
| Volatilityi | 21.35% | 19.19% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | -0.06 | 0.25 | |
| Sortino ratioi | -0.09 | 0.35 | |
| Max drawdowni | 36.87% | 23.77% | |
| Current drawdowni | 28.79% | 17.50% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 11.16% | 6.52% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 13.65% | 8.80% | |
| Max daily dropi | 14.57% | 8.74% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 18.53% | 16.27% |
| Category | KMB | PG |
|---|---|---|
| Company | Kimberly-Clark Corporation | The Procter & Gamble Company |
| Sector | Consumer Defensive | Consumer Defensive |
| Industry | Household & Personal Products | Household & Personal Products |
| Core business | A consumer products company known for tissue, diaper, and personal care brands sold globally under names spanning both premium and value price tiers. | A diversified consumer products company with a broad portfolio spanning personal care, home care, and grooming brands sold across more than 100 countries. |
| Investor focus | Organic volume and pricing trends across tissue and personal care categories, pulp and fiber input cost movements, and emerging market growth contribution. | Organic sales growth balancing volume and pricing, innovation-driven premiumization, and emerging market category penetration. |
- Leading positions in tissue and diaper categories provide strong household brand recognition worldwide
- Presence across both premium and value price tiers helps it retain share across different consumer segments
- Long dividend growth history reflects consistent cash generation from its core paper and hygiene businesses
- Diversified portfolio spanning personal care, home care, and grooming reduces reliance on any single category
- Global scale supports significant investment in product innovation and marketing across its brand portfolio
- Long history of dividend increases reflects durable free cash flow generation across economic cycles
- Pulp and other fiber input costs can be volatile and pressure margins if pricing does not keep pace
- Category growth in developed tissue and diaper markets is relatively mature and slow-moving
- Faces private label competition in several of its core paper product categories
- Input cost inflation across raw materials and packaging can pressure margins between pricing cycles
- Slower growth in some mature developed markets requires continued innovation to sustain volume trends
- Faces competition from both branded rivals and growing private label penetration in several categories
Want deeper AI forecasts?
This comparison page is public and free forever. Subscribers can unlock saved watchlists, full AI rankings, detailed forecasts, and interactive analysis tools.