Back1-800 Flowers.com Overview
1-800 Flowers.com Inc. - Ordinary Shares - Class A

1-800 Flowers.com PEG Ratio

Valuation check: FLWS's PEG ratio is -171.12, below the Consumer Discretionary sector average of -1.46.

Get informed when a big investor buys or sells

+ Follow

PEG Ratio

-171.12

PEG Ratio

-171.12

The PEG ratio measures a stock's valuation relative to its earnings growth rate. A PEG ratio below 1.0 may indicate that the stock is undervalued relative to its growth potential.

PEG Ratio (Comparison Companies)

Loading

PEG Ratio History

Loading

PEG Ratio Comparison

Loading

1-800 Flowers.com (FLWS) FAQ

1-800 Flowers.com posts a PEG ratio of -171.12. That is below the Consumer Discretionary sector average of -1.46. Comparing that reading with peers and prior periods is usually more useful than looking at the number in isolation.

For Consumer Discretionary stocks, a PEG ratio near -1.46 is typical. 1-800 Flowers.com's -171.12 is lower that level. That is roughly 11634.8% below the sector mean. Whether that is a warning or an opportunity depends on growth outlook and other fundamentals shown elsewhere on Stockcircle.

1-800 Flowers.com's PEG ratio of -171.12 comes from dividing a price-based measure by a related financial statistic. Changes can come from the stock price moving, the underlying fundamental shifting, or both. Track both the level and the trend — a rising multiple on falling fundamentals is a different story than a rising multiple on rising earnings.

Context for FLWS's PEG ratio usually means three checks: (1) trend versus prior periods, (2) level versus peers (average -1.46), and (3) consistency with growth and profitability. This page covers the first two; 1-800 Flowers.com's other metric pages and overview cover the third.

Judging 1-800 Flowers.com against Consumer Discretionary peers is usually better than using a market-wide rule of thumb. Business models inside Consumer Discretionary are more comparable, which makes gaps in PEG ratio easier to interpret. Start with -171.12 here, then scan peer and history charts to see if the gap is persistent.