Imperial Brands (IMB) Competitors

British American Tobacco (LON:BATS) and Imperial Brands (LON:IMB) are both large-cap consumer defensive companies, but which is the superior stock? We will compare the two businesses based on the strength of their valuation, institutional ownership, profitability, analyst recommendations, earnings, dividends, risk and media sentiment.

Which has better valuation and earnings, BATS or IMB?

Imperial Brands has higher revenue and earnings than British American Tobacco. Imperial Brands is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than British American Tobacco, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Company	Gross Revenue	Price/Sales Ratio	Net Income	Earnings Per Share	Price/Earnings Ratio
British American Tobacco	£25.60B	3.37	-£13.64B	£139.30	28.41
Imperial Brands	£31.95B	0.76	£1.98B	£299.60	10.03

Which has more risk and volatility, BATS or IMB?

British American Tobacco has a beta of 0.27, suggesting that its share price is 73% less volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Imperial Brands has a beta of 0.42, suggesting that its share price is 58% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Is BATS or IMB a better dividend stock?

British American Tobacco pays an annual dividend of GBX 237.88 per share and has a dividend yield of 6.0%. Imperial Brands pays an annual dividend of GBX 153.42 per share and has a dividend yield of 5.1%. British American Tobacco pays out 170.8% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Imperial Brands pays out 51.2% of its earnings in the form of a dividend.

Do analysts rate BATS or IMB?

British American Tobacco presently has a consensus price target of GBX 4,040, suggesting a potential upside of 2.10%. Imperial Brands has a consensus price target of GBX 3,600, suggesting a potential upside of 19.76%. Given Imperial Brands' stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Imperial Brands is more favorable than British American Tobacco.

Company	Sell Ratings	Hold Ratings	Buy Ratings	Strong Buy Ratings	Rating Score
British American Tobacco	1 Sell rating(s)	1 Hold rating(s)	3 Buy rating(s)	0 Strong Buy rating(s)	2.40
Imperial Brands	0 Sell rating(s)	0 Hold rating(s)	2 Buy rating(s)	0 Strong Buy rating(s)	3.00

Do institutionals & insiders hold more shares of BATS or IMB?

75.6% of British American Tobacco shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 80.9% of Imperial Brands shares are owned by institutional investors. 0.1% of British American Tobacco shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 0.4% of Imperial Brands shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Is BATS or IMB more profitable?

Imperial Brands has a net margin of 11.44% compared to British American Tobacco's net margin of -52.84%. Imperial Brands' return on equity of 41.84% beat British American Tobacco's return on equity.

Company	Net Margins	Return on Equity	Return on Assets
British American Tobacco	-52.84%	-25.94%	5.16%
Imperial Brands	11.44%	41.84%	6.92%

Does the media refer more to BATS or IMB?

In the previous week, Imperial Brands had 2 more articles in the media than British American Tobacco. MarketBeat recorded 6 mentions for Imperial Brands and 4 mentions for British American Tobacco. Imperial Brands' average media sentiment score of 0.70 beat British American Tobacco's score of 0.38 indicating that Imperial Brands is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Company	Very Positive	Positive	Neutral	Negative	Very Negative	Overall Sentiment
British American Tobacco	1 Very Positive mention(s)	1 Positive mention(s)	2 Neutral mention(s)	0 Negative mention(s)	0 Very Negative mention(s)	Neutral
Imperial Brands	2 Very Positive mention(s)	2 Positive mention(s)	2 Neutral mention(s)	0 Negative mention(s)	0 Very Negative mention(s)	Positive

Summary

Imperial Brands beats British American Tobacco on 14 of the 18 factors compared between the two stocks.