PKG, Packaging Corp of America
We will produce less containerboard than the fourth quarter with two fewer operating days in the first quarter, a scheduled maintenance outage at our Counce, TN mill and lower production at the reconfigured Wallula, WA mill.
Read top to bottom, the owner's questions in the order an owner asks them: what the business is, whether the record holds, whether it survives and is any good, and what you would be paying. New to the questions? Start with the Method.
The business in brief
read the 10-K →What this business is and what moves its needle, read from the numbers in its filings. The quantitative detail is in the sections below; the verdict is left to you.
- What it is
- Revenue is Packaging (92%), Paper (7%) and Corporate and Other (1%).
- What moves the needle
- How hard the assets work, and what the inputs cost. What decides it: utilization, how much of the capex merely keeps the assets running, and what a downturn does to a heavy fixed-cost base.
- Is it a good business?
- Return on capital has run in the teens (median 13%, above 15% in 5 of 10 years). Owner earnings agree: roughly 8% of revenue reaches owners as cash, consistently. Returns like these are solid but short of clear franchise economics; whether they hold is what the 10-K settles, not the multiple.
Every line here is arithmetic from the company's own filings, not a model's opinion, and each figure appears in full in the sections below.
Where the money comes from
read the 10-K →The biggest segment, Packaging, is also where the profit is made: 92% of revenue and 90% of segment operating profit.
- Packaging92%$8.3B90% of profit
- Paper7%$615M10% of profit
- Corporate and Other1%$80Mloss
From the segment footnote of the company's own 10-K. Shares are of total revenue; the profit bar shows each segment's share of segment operating profit, before unallocated corporate costs.
The record, 2016–2025
realized figures from each filing, no estimates| 2016’16 | 2017’17 | 2018’18 | 2019’19 | 2020’20 | 2021’21 | 2022’22 | 2023’23 | 2024’24 | 2025’25 | TTMTTMMar 2026 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueRevenue | $5.8B | $6.4B | $7.0B | $7.0B | $6.7B | $7.7B | $8.5B | $7.8B | $8.4B | $9.0B | $9.2B |
| Operating marginOp. mgn | 13.6% | 14.5% | 15.2% | 15.1% | 10.9% | 16.1% | 16.8% | 13.8% | 13.1% | 12.3% | 11.7% |
| Net incomeNet inc. | $450M | $669M | $738M | $696M | $461M | $841M | $1.0B | $765M | $805M | $774M | $741M |
| EPS (diluted)EPS | $4.80 | $7.14 | $7.86 | $7.40 | $4.88 | $8.90 | $11.11 | $8.55 | $9.00 | $8.64 | $8.32 |
| Owner earningsOwner earn. | $533M | $513M | $629M | $808M | $612M | $489M | $671M | $845M | $522M | $729M | $702M |
| ROICROIC | 12% | 16% | 17% | 16% | 11% | 17% | 18% | 13% | 13% | 10% | 10% |
| CapexCapex | $274M | $343M | $551M | $400M | $421M | $605M | $824M | $470M | $670M | $829M | $846M |
| Capex / revenueCapex/rev | 4.7% | 5.3% | 7.9% | 5.7% | 6.3% | 7.8% | 9.7% | 6.0% | 8.0% | 9.2% | 9.2% |
| Capex vs depreciationCapex/dep | 0.77× | 0.88× | 1.34× | 1.03× | 1.03× | 1.45× | 1.80× | 0.91× | 1.27× | 1.27× | 1.14× |
| Total debtDebt | $2.6B | $2.6B | $2.5B | $2.5B | $2.5B | $2.5B | $2.5B | $2.9B | $2.5B | $4.0B | $4.0B |
| Cash & investmentsCash+inv | $239M | $217M | $362M | $680M | $975M | $619M | $320M | $648M | $685M | $529M | $397M |
| Net debt / (cash)Net debt | $2.4B | $2.4B | $2.1B | $1.8B | $1.5B | $1.9B | $2.2B | $2.2B | $1.8B | $3.4B | $3.6B |
Owner’s Scorecard
Will it survive?
- No meaningful interest burdenLittle or no interest expense reported
Little or no interest expense reported, the business isn't leaning on lenders to operate.
- ModerateTotal debt $4.0B ÷ operating income $1.1B
Years of operating profit it would take to repay all debt. A first read, not a credit rating: it's gross debt (not netted against cash) over EBIT (not EBITDA), and a cyclical year distorts it.
- Debt, net of cash $3.4BMeaningful net debtCash $529M − debt $4.0B
Netting $529M of cash and short-term investments against $4.0B of debt leaves $3.4B owed, about 3.1× a year's operating profit, versus the gross figure above. Net debt is the leverage figure that matters; the gross ratio above ignores the cash already set against it. Strategic or illiquid investments aren't counted here.
- Capital-hungryDSO 51 + DIO 64 − DPO 24 days
Days cash is tied up between paying suppliers and collecting from customers. Lower is better; a long cycle means growth itself eats cash.
Is it a good business?
- SolidNOPAT $834M ÷ invested capital $8.0B (debt + equity − cash)
The rate the business earns on the money tied up in it, Buffett's north star, because over time a stock tracks the ROIC beneath it. Above ~15% sustained hints at a moat; below ~8% the company may destroy value as it grows. Asset-light businesses (R&D expensed, little capital) read artificially high, pair this with Owner Earnings.
- SolidOwner Earnings $729M = operating cash $1.6B − capex $829M
What an owner could take out without starving the business. That's 8% of revenue. Treating stock comp as the real expense it is (less $45M of SBC) leaves $683M. Honest caveat: capex here blends maintenance and growth, so steady-state Owner Earnings may run higher (see capex vs. depreciation).
- Cash-backedCash from ops $1.6B ÷ net income $774M
How much of reported profit showed up as operating cash. Above 1× is reassuring; well below suggests earnings lean on accruals. One year is noisy, growth and working-capital swings distort it, and this is operating cash, not free cash. Watch the multi-year trend.
How is the cash used?
- Returns about halfDividends + buybacks $603M ÷ Owner Earnings $729M
Of $729M Owner Earnings, $603M (83%) went back to shareholders, $450M dividends, $153M buybacks. Net of $45M stock comp, the real buyback was about $108M. Returning most of it signals a mature cash machine; reinvesting most could mean a long runway, or empire-building. The split doesn't say which; the return earned on it (see ROIC) does.
- Investing or harvesting? 1.27×ExpandingCapex $829M ÷ depreciation $653M
Descriptive, not a grade. Above ~1× means investing faster than assets wear out (growth, or, sustained for years, today's earnings carrying less depreciation than tomorrow's will). Below means spending less than it's wearing out (efficiency, or a melting asset base). The ratio won't tell you which; the filings will.
Durability & moat, 2016–2025
A moat is a high return that doesn’t fade, reinvested at high returns. Here is what the record says, judgments, not another chart of the numbers.
- Profitable years 10 of 10
Never lost money over the record, the earnings stability Graham insisted on.
- Return on capital ≥ 15% 5 of 10 yrs
A moat shows up as a high return on invested capital that holds year after year, not one good vintage.
- Operating margin 14% (FY2016) → 12% (FY2025)
Margins held roughly steady across the record.
- Reinvestment, incremental ROIC 6%
Reinvested capital earned only a modest return, growth is getting expensive.
- Owner earnings growth +2%/yr
Free cash to owners grew about 2% a year over the record.
- Worst year 2020 · 10.9% op. margin
Stayed profitable even in its hardest year, the resilience that survives recessions.
- Share count −0.5%/yr
Roughly flat share count, little dilution, little buyback.
- Dividend record rising
Paid and raised the dividend across the record, the continuity Graham prized.
Solvent is not the same as cheap; growing is not the same as good. These are vital signs, not a verdict, the judgment is yours, and the filing is one click away.
How the cash was used, 2016–2025
Over the record, the business generated $11.7B of operating cash, and how management split it is, as Buffett insists, the job that matters most. Here it reads as a balanced allocator, splitting cash between the business, owners, and the balance sheet.
- Reinvested$5.4B · 46%
- Dividends$3.5B · 30%
- Buybacks$1.0B · 9%
- Retained (debt / cash)$1.9B · 16%
It reinvested $5.4B (46%) back into the business and returned $4.5B (38%) to owners, $3.5B in dividends, $1.0B in buybacks. Total debt rose $1.3B across the span.
Buybacks are gross of stock issued to employees; net of that, the real return to owners is lower (see Management & pay). And the mix alone doesn't grade management, what matters is the return earned on the dollars reinvested (see incremental ROIC in the durability report).
Management & pay
Two questions Buffett actually asks about pay: is stock compensation, a real expense, whatever the income statement pretends, quietly large, and is the top wildly out of line with the floor. He's no populist about it; he just wants pay that's rational and earned, and comp committees that aren't lapdogs.
- Stock-based compensation$45M
The slice of the business handed to employees in shares this year, 1% of revenue, equal to 4% of operating profit. Buffett's oldest accounting fight: this is compensation, compensation is an expense, real whether or not the headline earnings admit it. And note the trap, the cash-flow statement adds SBC back, so the operating cash, and the owner earnings drawn from it, are flattered by exactly this amount; counted as the cost it is, what an owner keeps is lower.
Graham’s defensive-investor test
4 of 6 metGraham gave the defensive investor seven numerical criteria in The Intelligent Investor. Here they are, run mechanically on the filings, his framework, not our verdict. Meeting them is a floor of safety, not a reason to buy; missing one is no veto, since many fine modern businesses fail his strictest liquidity tests by design. The worth is in seeing exactly where a company stands against the canon, every number sourced.
- Adequate size PassRevenue ≥ $2B · $9.0B
Big enough to weather a storm. Graham's 1972 floor was ~$100M of sales (≈ $700M today); we use a $2B revenue line as a conservative modern stand-in.
- Strong liquidity PassCurrent ratio ≥ 2× · 3.17×
Current assets at least twice current liabilities, near-term bills covered without touching the business. Strict by design: many cash-rich modern firms run leaner and miss it, holding their cushion in longer-dated securities.
- Conservative debt MissDebt ≤ working capital · $4.0B vs $2.2B WC
Graham's rule that borrowings not exceed net current assets. Capital-heavy and buyback-heavy firms routinely fail it, read it next to interest coverage, not alone.
- Earnings stability PassA profit every year (10-yr record) · no losses
Graham wanted earnings in each of the past ten years, the stability a defensive owner leans on.
- Dividend record PassUninterrupted dividends · paid every year (10)
An unbroken dividend was Graham's mark of durability. He wanted twenty years; the filings show about ten, and a single suspension breaks the streak. Non-payers, many fine modern compounders, fall outside his defensive net by design.
- Earnings growth NearEarnings +33% over the record · +26%
At least a third more earnings than a decade ago, averaging three years at each end. Net income (not per-share), so stock splits don't distort it, buybacks and dilution show up in the share-count line instead.
- Moderate price —P/E ≤ 15 and P/E × P/B ≤ 22.5 · decided by the price
Graham's valuation gate, the wall he kept between a sound business and a sound investment. Earnings are $8.64/share and book value $51.32/share. Enter a price in “What the price implies” just below for the P/E, P/B, and whether it clears. But this is the rule Buffett outgrew: there's no hard P/E law, and a wonderful business can deserve a far richer multiple if the thesis holds, treat it as the bargain-hunter's floor, not a verdict on the price.
Graham would be the first to say a checklist is a starting point, not an answer. These are his defensive, bargain-hunter's tests, the cigar-butt lens. Buffett and Munger grew past it, paying fair prices for wonderful businesses; that lens lives in the moat and owner-earnings work above, and both still matter. Clearing Graham’s tests earns a closer look; failing them earns harder questions, not a dismissal.
What the price implies
reverse-DCFA price is the one input we don't pull, you bring it. Type today's close (read it off any broker or quote site) and see the owner-earnings growth you'd have to believe to justify it, set beside what Packaging Corp of America has actually delivered. Nothing is stored; the number stays in your browser.
Enter a price above to run it.
Graham capped the multiple at 15×; Buffett and Munger let that rule go, a wonderful business can deserve 50× if the thesis holds. Read it as the bargain-hunter's floor, not a ceiling on good sense.
The discount rate is your interest rate, what a dollar years from now is worth today, anchored to the long-term Treasury yield (~4–5% today, plus whatever premium you want for risk). Drag it toward the risk-free rate and watch how much growth the price suddenly “needs”: interest rates are gravity on valuations.
Owner earnings $702M on 89M diluted shares; net debt $3.6B. This is a lens, not a price target, it says what you'd have to believe, not what the company is worth, and it runs on one year of (noisy) owner earnings at assumptions you can see and change.
What the filing emphasizes, FY2025
read the 10-K →Each year a 10-K must name what could go wrong, in the company's own words. Here are the ones Graham and Buffett would stop on, each set against the figure from the same filings that bears on it, anchored to a period you can find in the record above. We point; the judgment is yours.
- Customer concentrationBusiness
Who the revenue leans on. When one buyer is a large slice of sales, that buyer holds the pricing power, and its troubles become the company's.
“Based on the Company's experience, customer returns, allowances, and earned discounts have averaged approximately 1 % of gross selling pr ice.”
From the recordRevenue exposed (TTM)$9.2B - Pricing power & competitionMD&A
Whether the company sets its price or takes it. Durable pricing power is the surest mark of a moat; price competition is the surest mark there isn't one.
“Our industries are highly competitive, with no single containerboard, corrugated packaging, or UFS paper producer having a dominant position.”
From the recordOperating margin11.7% now (TTM), off a 16.8% peak (FY2022) - Concentrated dependenceMD&A
What the whole business leans on, a product, a platform, a partner. Concentration cuts both ways, and the filing is where management has to admit it.
“The availability and cost of recycled fiber depends heavily on recycling rates and the domestic and global supply and demand for recycled products.”
From the recordOwner-earnings margin at stake (TTM)8% - Debt terms & refinancingBusiness
The fine print behind the debt. Covenants and near-term maturities decide who is really in control when a year goes badly.
“The Credit Agreements have a financial covenant for maximum leverage ratio calculated on a consolidated basis.”
From the recordBalance sheet (TTM)$3.4B meaningful net debt · no real interest burden - Litigation & contingenciesBusiness
Claims an owner inherits. Most disclosure is boilerplate; this fires only on an actual matter, a named suit, a settlement, a contingency, a number.
“Legal Proceedings On July 29, 2025, PCA and seven other U.S. and Canadian containerboard producers were named as defendants in a purported class action lawsuit, Artuso Pastry Foods Corp v.”
A judgment, not a number, weigh it against the filing yourself. - Cyclicality & demandMD&A
How the business behaves when the economy turns. A cyclical earns its keep across the whole cycle, not at the peak.
“These conditions are beyond our control and may have a material impact on our business, results of operations, liquidity, and financial position. 10 Industry Cyclicality Changes in the prices of our products could materially affect our financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.”
From the recordWorst year on record10.9% operating margin (FY2020) - Regulation & policyBusiness
Rules that can rewrite the economics, tariffs, antitrust, data, export controls.
“In November 2024, PCA was one of seven companies selected by EPA to respond to a questionnaire about operations and equipment to support EPA's requirement to revise existing Pulp MACT standards.”
A judgment, not a number, weigh it against the filing yourself.
What changed, FY2025 vs FY2024
read the 10-K →Most of a 10-K is boilerplate carried over verbatim; the signal is in what's new. These lines appear this year and weren't there last, figure updates filtered out, so only the language shift remains.
- “If the Greif containerboard business underperforms relative to our expectations, or if we fail to successfully integrate the business or experience difficulties in implementing our systems into the acquired business, it may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and resu…”
- “Our IT team regularly monitors best practices and as needed, implements changes to the Company's cyber risk management program to ensure a robust program is maintained.”
- “Treasury securities 3.1 4 — 6.7 5 — U.S. government agency securities 0.8 1 — — — — $ 20.4 31 $ 0.1 $ 9.4 9 $ — (c) Unrealized losses were insignificant for the debt securities in a continuous loss position less than 12 months for the period ended December 31, 2025, and for the debt securities in a …”
- “Excluding special items, we recorded $888 million of net income, or $9.84 per diluted share, in 2025, compared to $814 million, or $9.04 per diluted share, in 2024. 1 The increase was driven by improvement in legacy PCA's earnings by $0.96 per share, partially offset by a loss of ($0.16) per share f…”
- “Outlook Looking ahead to the first quarter of 2026, in our Packaging segment, we expect higher per-day volume in our legacy corrugated products plants over last year, reflecting improving demand, though shipment volume is seasonally slower than the fourth quarter and we experienced some disruption i…”
Classic text analysis over the filing itself, no model wrote a word of this, and every quote is the company's own.
Peers, Paper & packaging
The same industry, side by side on owner economics, compare, don't rank by a single number.● marks best in the group.
| Company | Revenue | Gross margin | Op. margin | ROIC | Owner earn. margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IPInternational Paper Company | $23.6B | 30% | 10.0% | 8% | -1% |
| KMBKimberly-Clark Corp. | $16.4B | 36% | 14.3% | 23% | 10% |
| PKGPackaging Corp of America | $9.0B | 21% | 12.3% | 10% | 8% |
| AVYAvery Dennison Corporation | $8.9B | 29% | 12.0% | 14% | 8% |