Campbell’s Co (CPB)

Payables turnover

Jul 31, 2025 Apr 30, 2025 Jan 31, 2025 Oct 31, 2024 Jul 31, 2024 Jul 28, 2024 Apr 30, 2024 Apr 28, 2024 Jan 31, 2024 Jan 28, 2024 Oct 31, 2023 Oct 29, 2023 Jul 31, 2023 Jul 30, 2023 Apr 30, 2023 Jan 31, 2023 Jan 29, 2023 Oct 31, 2022 Oct 30, 2022 Jul 31, 2022
Cost of revenue (ttm) US$ in thousands 7,134,000 7,136,000 7,587,000 7,358,000 7,555,000 7,617,000 7,537,000 7,630,000 7,668,000 7,400,000 7,038,000 6,869,000 6,455,000 7,160,000 7,145,000 7,706,000 7,396,000 7,098,000 6,822,000 6,240,000
Payables US$ in thousands 1,297,000 1,356,000 1,453,000 1,311,000 1,311,000 1,330,000 1,330,000 1,305,000 1,305,000 1,368,000 1,368,000 1,306,000 1,306,000 1,353,000 1,374,000 1,374,000 1,447,000 1,447,000 1,334,000
Payables turnover 5.50 5.60 5.06 5.76 5.81 5.67 5.74 5.88 5.67 5.14 5.02 4.94 5.48 5.28 5.61 5.38 4.91 4.71 4.68

July 31, 2025 calculation

Payables turnover = Cost of revenue (ttm) ÷ Payables
= $7,134,000K ÷ $—K
= —

The payables turnover ratio for Campbell’s Co demonstrates a generally stable trend over the period examined. Starting from a low of 4.68 times as of July 31, 2022, it gradually increased, reaching a peak of 5.88 times by January 31, 2024. This indicates that the company has been improving its efficiency in settling its accounts payable, suggesting a more prompt payment cycle or an optimization in managing liabilities.

Between subsequent periods, the ratio has shown slight fluctuations, with minor declines and increases. For instance, after reaching the peak in January 2024, the ratio slightly decreased to 5.76 by July 31, 2024, before declining further to 5.06 as of October 31, 2024. This modest dip could reflect a temporary stretch in the payables period, possibly due to strategic payment deferrals or changes in supplier terms.

Overall, the long-term trajectory indicates that Campbell’s Co has maintained a relatively consistent payables turnover rate, reflecting disciplined management of trade payables within a stable operating cycle. The ratio’s fluctuations suggest responsive adjustments to operational or strategic needs, but the overall levels suggest sound liquidity management practices.