Bunzl leads structurally, with profitability as the clearest single gap between the two profiles. Carrefour still leads on valuation and stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup is currently leaning toward Carrefour, which does not confirm the structural lead. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Bunzl, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
The comparison is mainly decided in profitability, with the rest of the profile carrying less weight.
This comparison is anchored in long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
This level of similarity signals a strong structural match, even though some dimensions still separate the two companies.
The clearest structural overlap shows up in recent revenue growth and margin consistency.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The clearest separation appears in profitability.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Bunzl plc looks stronger, but the price setup still looks more supportive for Carrefour SA.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Capital efficiency adds support, with a 5.3-point ROIC advantage.
Stability still leans toward Carrefour SA, so the lead is real without reading as one-way.
Profitability gives Bunzl plc the clearer edge, even though stability and the price setup keep the overall picture from looking clean.
Break down the BNZL.L vs CA.PA comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how BNZL.L and CA.PA each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.