GIS — General Mills Inc
Snapshot dated September 2, 2026.
General Mills Inc. is a global manufacturer and marketer of branded consumer foods, operating across five primary segments: North America Retail, International, Pet, North America Foodservice, and Corporate. The company produces iconic food products including Cheerios, Häagen-Dazs ice cream, Pillsbury dough, and Blue Buffalo pet food. Its business model relies on retail distribution channels and direct-to-restaurant sales, reaching millions of households across more than 100 countries. As a massive scale player in the packaged food industry, it competes against other global consumer goods giants and private-label manufacturers. Recently, the company has been focused on rebalancing its portfolio through strategic divestitures of non-core assets while simultaneously expanding its capabilities in the premium pet food segment. The company maintains an extensive global manufacturing footprint, employing tens of thousands of staff members to manage its complex supply chain and production facilities.
Fair Value / Share
$40.30
Price on September 2, 2026
$40.95
Margin of Safety
-1.58%
Data by Equibles and SEC filings. Figures are as of September 2, 2026 and are not live.
Earnings Yield
Earnings Yield shows how much profit a company generates relative to its share price. EPS ÷ Stock Price.
Stock Price
$40.95
Market Cap
$22,018,815,000
Net Income (TTM)
-$87,600,000
Diluted Shares
537.7 million
EPS (TTM)
-$0.16
Earnings Yield
-0.4%
AI Analysis
General Mills Inc. currently shows an earnings yield of -0.40%, derived from a stock price of $40.95 and an EPS of $-0.16. This figure sits below the 4-5% return available from safe, alternative investments like bonds. Because the earnings yield is negative, it reflects the company’s current net loss rather than a positive return on capital. For this yield to become positive and approach or exceed the 4-5% benchmark, the company would need to transition from a net loss to consistent, positive net income, or experience a significant shift in its share price. This calculation is a static measure based on historical trailing earnings and does not account for future operational changes, potential balance sheet restructuring, or macro-economic shifts in consumer demand.
Return on Capital
EBIT ÷ (Net Working Capital + Net Fixed Assets) — how efficiently the business turns capital into profit.
EBIT (TTM)
$885,800,000
Net Working Capital
-$1,487,600,000
Net Fixed Assets
$3,443,400,000
Invested Capital
$1,955,800,000
Return on Capital
45.29%
AI Analysis
General Mills (GIS) generated an EBIT of $885.8M on an invested capital base of $2B, resulting in a return on capital of 45.29%. Measured against the framework's 30% benchmark for efficient capital use, this figure indicates a high level of profit generation relative to the tangible capital required to support the business's operations. This ratio is calculated by dividing the operating profit by the sum of net working capital of -$1.5B and net fixed assets of $3.4B. This measure does not capture differences in capital intensity across industries, nor does it account for external factors like heavy reinvestment strategies that might temporarily depress the figure during an early-growth phase. This return on capital would change if there were shifts in the efficiency of asset utilization or structural changes to the company's working capital requirements.
Acquirer's Multiple
Enterprise Value ÷ Operating Earnings — how many years of operating earnings it would take to buy the whole business.
| Company | Operating earnings | Enterprise value | Multiple |
|---|---|---|---|
| GISGeneral Mills Inc | $3.9B | $35.1B | 9.1x |
| CAGConagra Brands Inc. | $1.3B | $14.8B | 11.2x |
| KHCKraft Heinz Co | -$3.2B | $47.6B | — |
Where GIS sits: 9.1x against a peer median of 11.2x (peers: 11.2x) — 18.7% below the median.
Show the enterprise value bridge for each companyHide the enterprise value bridge
GIS
Debt $13.5B. This is the company's reported total debt — borrowings due within a year plus long-term borrowings. The company separately reports $402.4M of operating lease liabilities as of 2026-05-31 ($300.4M non-current, $102M current). These are excluded from debt because operating lease cost already sits inside operating earnings — counting the liability again as debt would charge the business twice for the same thing.
KHC
Named as a competitor: competes in branded packaged foods, snacks, and convenience meals
Debt $19B. This is the company's reported total debt — borrowings due within a year plus long-term borrowings. The company separately reports $553M of operating lease liabilities as of 2025-12-27 ($427M non-current, $126M current). These are excluded from debt because operating lease cost already sits inside operating earnings — counting the liability again as debt would charge the business twice for the same thing.
CAG
Named as a competitor: competes in shelf-stable packaged foods, frozen meals, and snacks
Debt $7.3B. This is reported total debt, including $240.4M of finance lease obligations ($16.1M + $224.3M in the filing). Finance leases are counted as debt because they are a borrowing in substance — the company has committed to fixed payments for an asset it effectively owns.
Operating earnings — GIS
AI Analysis
General Mills Inc (GIS) has an Acquirer's Multiple of 9.1x, derived from an enterprise value of $35.1B and operating earnings of $3.9B. Among the peers with a valid multiple, Conagra Brands (CAG) has an Acquirer's Multiple of 11.2x based on an enterprise value of $14.8B and operating earnings of $1.3B. The third company, Kraft Heinz (KHC), is losing money right now, so no multiple can be calculated for it, as there is no positive earnings figure to divide into. Consequently, CAG has the highest multiple, while GIS sits at 9.1x against a peer median of 11.2x (peers: 11.2x) — 18.7% below the median. This comparison reflects the relative cost of acquiring each business's operating earnings, and the gap would close if the operating margins of these businesses were to shift relative to one another or if their respective enterprise values were repriced by the market to reflect a different assessment of their future earning power.
FS-Score
A 10-check read on financial health, across profitability, balance-sheet stability and operating momentum.
FS-Score
4/10
Low overall score — check which pillar below is dragging it down before assuming this is cheap for a bad reason.
Section 1
Current Profitability
1/3
Current profitability is Weak, with only one of the three cash-based health signals showing a positive result.
- Return on Assets (ROA) is currently -0.29%, failing the benchmark for positive net income.
- Free Cash Flow to Total Assets (FCFTA) is 5.42%, indicating the company is generating positive cash flow from its assets despite accounting losses.
- The Accruals check failed with a value of -24.73, as cash flow from operations did not exceed net income.
This score reflects a mismatch between accounting profits and cash generation; a shift toward positive net income would be required to change this rating.
Return on Assets (ROA > 0)
FailFree Cash Flow to Total Assets (FCFTA > 0)
PassAccruals (CFO / Net Income > 1)
FailSection 2
Stability
2/3
The Stability score is Mixed, reflecting a reduction in share count and slightly better liquidity offset by a rising debt burden.
- Leverage increased as the ratio of long-term debt to assets rose from 0.38 last year to 0.41.
- Liquidity improved slightly, with the current ratio moving from 0.67 to 0.68 year over year.
- Net Dilution passed as the annual weighted average share count fell from 557.5 million to 537.7 million shares.
While the company is reducing share count, a stabilization or reduction in the long-term debt ratio would be necessary to improve this pillar.
Change in Leverage (↓ or unchanged)
FailChange in Liquidity (↑ Current Ratio)
PassNet Dilution (annual diluted weighted-average shares, this year vs last)
PassSection 3
Recent Operational Improvements
1/4
Recent Operational Improvements are Weak, as the business saw declines in efficiency and margins across most measured categories.
- ROA declined year over year, falling from 6.94% to -0.29%.
- FCFTA trended lower, dropping from 6.93% in the prior year to 5.42%.
- Gross Margin contracted from 34.55% to 33.63%, indicating higher costs or lower pricing power.
- Asset Turnover improved from 0.59 to 0.61, showing better revenue generation per dollar of assets.
For this score to improve, the company would need to reverse the downward trend in its gross margins and cash flow productivity.
Change in ROA (↑)
FailChange in FCFTA (↑)
FailChange in Gross Margin (↑)
FailChange in Asset Turnover (↑)
PassFramework conclusion
The company has an overall score of 4/10, driven primarily by weak profitability and deteriorating operational trends. This score suggests that if the stock appears cheap, the price may reflect genuine business deterioration rather than a simple market mispricing. The rating is a result of failing six out of the ten stability and growth checks monitored in this framework.
- Return on Assets (ROA) fell significantly from 6.94% to -0.29%.
- The leverage ratio increased from 0.38 to 0.41, signaling a heavier debt load.
- Gross Margin decreased to 33.63% from 34.55% a year ago.
- Diluted shares outstanding were reduced to 537.7 million shares.
Intrinsic Value (DCF)
A 10-year discounted cash flow, then the bridge from business value to value per share.
Reported cash flow → unlevered free cash flow
Free Cash Flow (reported)
$1.6B
+ After-Tax Interest Expense
$459.1M
= Unlevered Free Cash Flow
$2.1B
Business value (10-year DCF)
PV of Years 1–10
$15B
PV of Terminal Value
$19.7B
= Business Value
$34.8B
Business value → share value
Intrinsic Value (business)
$34.8B
+ Cash & Equivalents
$453.8M
− Debt
$13.5B
= Shareholders' Value
$21.7B
÷ Diluted Shares
537.7 million
= Fair Value / Share
$40.30
Divided by 537.7 million diluted shares — the weighted-average diluted count from the most recent quarterly income statement, for the quarter ended 2026-05-31.
Risk bucket → discount rate
low (9%)
Year-1 FCF
$2.1B
Growth rate (yrs 1–10)
3%
Terminal growth (after yr 10)
3%
AI Analysis
This valuation applies a 9% discount rate, reflecting General Mills' stable, defensive nature as a packaged food company with predictable cash flows. The 3.00% growth rate for years 1-10 aligns with the mature, modest expansion typical of this industry. The forecast begins with a fixed Year-1 unlevered free cash flow of $2.1B. Terminal value, calculated using a fixed 3% growth rate, accounts for 56.8% of the total business value. This indicates that a majority of the estimated worth depends on long-term performance beyond the next decade. After accounting for cash and equivalents and subtracting $13.5B in debt, the value belonging to shareholders is $21.7B. Dividing this by 537.7 million shares results in a fair value per share of $40.30. With a current price of $40.95, the margin of safety is -1.58%, representing the buffer between the estimate and the market price. The result is most sensitive to the chosen discount rate. If the perceived risk of the business were to increase, necessitating a higher discount rate, the resulting fair value per share would decrease significantly. Conversely, adjustments to the growth rate assumption would alter the present value of cash flows, though the terminal value's large proportional weight means the business's long-term steady-state assumptions remain the primary driver of this figure.
Overall Verdict
How the five signals above stack up together, then the full synthesis.
Earnings Yield
-0.4% vs ~4-5% bond-yield benchmark
Return on Capital
45.29% ROC vs ~30% benchmark
Acquirer's Multiple
9.1x against a peer median of 11.2x (peers: 11.2x) — 18.7% below the median.
FS-Score
4/10 — Proceed with caution
Intrinsic Value
-1.58% margin of safety
These five metrics present a split view of General Mills, contrasting operational efficiency against valuation and stability benchmarks. The Return on Capital of 45.29% exceeds the 30% benchmark, and the Acquirer's Multiple of 9.1x sits 18.7% below the 11.2x peer median, suggesting the business generates significant earnings relative to its enterprise value and acquisition price. Conversely, the Earnings Yield at -0.4% falls below the 4-5% bond-yield benchmark, and the Intrinsic Value check indicates a -1.58% margin of safety, meaning the price sits slightly above the calculated intrinsic level. Additionally, the FS-Score of 4/10 reflects lower stability in the underlying financial metrics. This creates tension between strong capital returns and a valuation that currently reflects little margin of safety relative to safer asset yields. The overall picture is most heavily influenced by the Earnings Yield; if that metric were to align with the bond-yield benchmark, the tension between the price and the business's operational output would dissipate.