Back to Portfolio
AMCR

Amcor PLC

$8.27 19.1B market cap December 24, 2025
Amcor PLC AMCR BUFFETT / MUNGER / KLARMAN SUMMARY
1 SNAPSHOT
Price$8.27
Market Cap19.1B
2 BUSINESS

Low quality business failing fundamental tests. ROE 7.5% (vs 15% threshold), commodity economics, 6.2% dividend yield funded by 100% of FCF with $14B debt. Berry merger adds integration risk. Buffett test score 2/7. Pass entirely.

3 MOAT NARROW

Limited switching costs (mainly pharmaceutical packaging ~15% of revenue), scale without pricing power, no structural cost advantages. Commodity economics with same raw materials, labor costs, and manufacturing technology as competitors.

4 MANAGEMENT
CEO: Peter Konieczny

Dividend consumes 100% of FCF (~$0.84B payout vs ~$0.81B FCF). No capital return flexibility. Berry merger adds $14B debt load. No growth investment capability. Debt/EBITDA ~5.3x post-merger is concerning.

5 ECONOMICS
6.7% Op Margin
6% ROIC
6% ROE
19x P/E
0.81B FCF
50% Debt/EBITDA
6 VALUATION
FCF Yield4.2%
DCF Range5.5 - 11.9

At fair value

7 MUNGER INVERSION
Kill Event Severity P() E[Loss]
Berry merger synergies disappoint by 30%+ HIGH - -
Dividend cut due to FCF shortfall MED - -
8 KLARMAN LENS
Downside Case

Berry merger synergies disappoint by 30%+

Why Market Right

Dividend trap: 6; 2% yield funded by 100% of FCF with $14B debt is not sustainable capital return

Catalysts

Berry merger synergy realization (quarterly updates); FCF coverage of dividend (must stay >1; 0x)

9 VERDICT REJECT
C Quality Moderate - 5.3x
Strong Buy$4.4
Buy$4.95
Fair Value$11.9

Monitor,

10 MACRO RESILIENCE -22
Strong Headwinds Required MoS: 31%
Monetary
-4
Geopolitical
0
Technology
0
Demographic
0
Climate
-8
Regulatory
-6
Governance
-2
Market
-2
Key Exposures
  • Plastic Regulatory Risk -12 EU Single-Use Plastics Directive, EPR schemes, plastic bans. 80% plastic business faces existential regulatory pressure worldwide.
  • Debt Crisis -6 $14.1B debt post-Berry merger. 5.3x Debt/EBITDA. Dividend consumes 100%+ of FCF. Financial engineering, not shareholder returns.
  • Commodity Economics -4 7% operating margins, 19% gross margins, 7.5% ROE. No pricing power. Every dollar retained earns below cost of capital.

Amcor is REJECTED on multiple grounds with -22 total score indicating strong headwinds. Three critical red flags triggered: debt crisis (-6), plastic regulatory pressure (-6), and ESG-driven social inflation (-6). The 6.2% dividend yield is a trap - paid from 100%+ of FCF with $14B debt, this is financial distress marketed as shareholder returns. ROE of 7.5% fails the 15% Buffett threshold catastrophically. Even at 31% required MoS, current price $8.27 implies fair value of $12 - absurd for a commodity business destroying capital. Peers (Sealed Air 35% ROE, Ball Corp 25% ROE) are vastly superior. This belongs in the "value trap" category - optically cheap multiples masking structural deterioration. The only winning move is not to play. REJECT.

🧠 ULTRATHINK Deep Philosophical Analysis

AMCR - Ultrathink Analysis

The Real Question

We're not asking "is Amcor worth buying?" The 7.5% ROE and commodity economics answered that: no. The real question is: Why does a fundamentally broken business attract investors, and what does that reveal about the traps that value investors must avoid?

The market sees Amcor as either a dividend opportunity or a turnaround play. Neither frame captures the reality. The deeper question: When a company earns below cost of capital, pays 100% of free cash flow as dividends, and just doubled its debt, is the 6.2% yield compensation or bait?

Hidden Assumptions

Assumption 1: High dividend yield means shareholder-friendly capital allocation. 6.2% yield looks generous. But examine the math: $0.84B in dividends against $0.81B in free cash flow. Payout ratio is ~104%. The dividend isn't funded by excess cash flow; it's funded by maintaining leverage and forgoing investment. This isn't generosity—it's financial desperation marketed as shareholder returns.

Assumption 2: The Berry merger creates value through synergies. $650M synergy target sounds impressive. But integration is never smooth. Interim CEO leading through transition. Culture clash between two commodity businesses. $14B debt load with 5.3x Debt/EBITDA. If synergies disappoint by 30%, the dividend gets cut and the stock falls 25%+.

Assumption 3: Packaging is defensive because everyone needs packages. Yes, everyone needs packages. But "need" doesn't equal "pricing power." Gross margins of 19% (vs 40%+ for quality businesses) reveal the truth: Amcor sells commodities to customers with bargaining power. Large CPG companies can and do pressure packaging suppliers on price.

Assumption 4: ESG concerns will moderate over time. Plastic packaging faces existential regulatory pressure. EU Single-Use Plastics Directive. Extended Producer Responsibility schemes. Consumer preference shifting to "plastic-free." The assumption that regulation will ease is hope, not analysis. The secular trend is against plastic, and Amcor is 80% plastic.

The Contrarian View

For the bulls to be right, we need to believe:

  1. ROE doesn't matter at cycle trough — The 7.5% ROE is temporary, and normalized ROE will exceed 15%. But Amcor has never earned 15% ROE. The 5-year average is 8%. This isn't cycle trough; this is structural mediocrity.

  2. Dividend is safe despite 100%+ payout ratio — Management will find operational improvements that boost FCF while maintaining leverage. But where does the extra cash come from in a commodity business?

  3. Plastic regulation reverses — Governments worldwide realize plastic packaging is essential and ease restrictions. But political momentum runs in the opposite direction.

  4. Berry synergies exceed targets — The largest merger in packaging history executes flawlessly under an interim CEO. But history suggests otherwise.

The probability of all four? Perhaps 10%. This is a value trap, not a value opportunity.

Simplest Thesis

Amcor is a commodity business disguised by a dividend yield—financial engineering masquerading as capital return.

Why This Opportunity Exists

The "opportunity" exists because yield-hungry investors can't resist 6.2%.

In a world of 5% risk-free rates, 6.2% with monthly dividends attracts capital despite fundamentals. The yield becomes the reason—the financials become noise.

What investors ignore:

  1. ROE below WACC destroys value — Every dollar retained earns 7.5%. Shareholders would be better off receiving 100% of earnings as dividends—but even that is more than FCF can support.

  2. Commodity economics are permanent — Packaging is raw materials + labor + energy. There's no IP, no switching costs (except minor pharma exposure), no network effects. The moat is imaginary.

  3. Peers are better — Sealed Air has 35% ROE. Ball Corp has 25% ROE. If you must own packaging, own companies that earn above cost of capital.

  4. The dividend yield is a warning, not an opportunity — High yields in industrial companies typically signal distress, not value. The market is correctly discounting Amcor's earnings power.

This is not an opportunity. This is a trap with a shiny yield wrapped around it.

What Would Change My Mind

  1. ROE exceeds 15% for two consecutive years — If operational improvements structurally increase returns on capital, the thesis changes. But this has never happened.

  2. Dividend coverage exceeds 1.5x FCF — If free cash flow grows enough to cover dividends with margin for deleveraging, the sustainability question resolves.

  3. Debt/EBITDA falls below 3x — If the balance sheet deleverages materially while maintaining dividend, the financial risk reduces.

  4. Stock drops to $5 (8%+ yield) — At that level, the yield might compensate for the quality deficiency. Maybe.

  5. Plastic regulation creates consolidation opportunity — If smaller competitors fail and Amcor gains share through attrition, the structural position improves.

None of these is likely. The correct action is avoidance.

The Soul of This Business

Strip away the merger, the dividend, the leverage. What is Amcor at its core?

Amcor is plastic formed into shapes. That's it. There's no secret sauce, no proprietary technology, no accumulated know-how that competitors can't replicate. The company exists because someone needs to make packages, and Amcor is large enough to do it at scale.

The soul is empty. Not evil—just empty. Amcor doesn't solve meaningful problems. It doesn't enable human flourishing. It doesn't push technology forward. It makes plastic containers for things people buy at supermarkets.

This emptiness explains the financials. When a business has no unique value proposition, it earns commodity returns. When commodity returns meet high leverage and dividend obligations, the mathematics become precarious.

Amcor's soul is survival—earning just enough to pay the bills while hoping nothing goes wrong. At $8.27, you're betting on survival. At any price, you're betting on something you shouldn't bet on.

The only winning move is not to play.

Executive Summary

Amcor is a global packaging company operating in a mature, commodity-like industry with thin margins (3-7% net), high leverage, and returns on equity (7.5%) that fail Buffett's 15% threshold. The company just completed a transformative merger with Berry Global, doubling its size but adding integration risk and debt. While the 6.2% dividend yield is attractive, the payout ratio approaches 100% of free cash flow, leaving no margin for error. This is a capital-intensive business competing on cost in a declining-growth industry facing sustainability headwinds.

Verdict: REJECT - Low returns on capital, commodity economics, integration risk, fails quality threshold.

Phase 1: Risk Analysis (Inversion)

"What Would Destroy This Investment?"

1. BERRY GLOBAL MERGER INTEGRATION FAILURE

Probability: MEDIUM | Impact: VERY HIGH

Amcor completed its merger with Berry Global in late 2024, creating a $24B revenue packaging giant. Integration risks include:

  • Culture clash between two large organizations
  • $650M synergy target may be optimistic
  • Management distraction during critical integration period
  • Interim CEO (Peter Konieczny) leading through transition
  • Debt load increased significantly ($14B total debt post-merger)

Kill Zone: If synergies disappoint by 30%+ or integration costs exceed projections, EPS could miss targets by 15-20%, dividend sustainability questioned.

Counter-evidence: Both companies operate similar businesses; Amcor has acquisition integration experience.

2. COMMODITY ECONOMICS / PRICING PRESSURE

Probability: HIGH | Impact: HIGH

Packaging is fundamentally a commodity business:

  • Gross margins only 19% (vs 40%+ for quality businesses)
  • Operating margins 7-10% leave little room for error
  • Raw material costs (resins, aluminum) pass-through with lag
  • Customer concentration with large CPG companies who have bargaining power
  • Private label growth pressures branded CPG customers

Kill Zone: A 2% compression in operating margin would eliminate 25% of net income.

Counter-evidence: Long-term customer contracts, some switching costs from regulatory approvals (especially pharma).

3. SUSTAINABILITY / ESG DISRUPTION

Probability: MEDIUM-HIGH | Impact: HIGH

Plastic packaging faces existential regulatory and consumer pressure:

  • EU Single-Use Plastics Directive restricting applications
  • Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes increasing costs
  • Consumer preference shifting toward "plastic-free"
  • Recycled content mandates require capital investment
  • Carbon taxes could impact cost structure

Kill Zone: If 20% of plastic packaging applications are regulated out of existence or taxed punitively, revenue could decline with no margin offset.

Counter-evidence: 89% of portfolio has recyclable alternative; company investing in sustainability; food safety still requires packaging.

4. DIVIDEND UNSUSTAINABILITY

Probability: MEDIUM | Impact: MEDIUM-HIGH

The 6.2% dividend yield looks attractive but is precarious:

  • FCF: ~$0.8-1.0B annually
  • Dividend payout: ~$0.84B (FY25)
  • Payout ratio: ~100% of FCF
  • Debt service obligations with $14B debt load
  • No room for business reinvestment or deleveraging

Kill Zone: Any FCF shortfall (recession, integration issues, raw material spike) could force dividend cut, triggering 20%+ stock decline.

Counter-evidence: Consistent FCF generation history; management committed to dividend.

5. CUSTOMER DESTOCKING / DEMAND VOLATILITY

Probability: MEDIUM | Impact: MEDIUM

FY24 demonstrated vulnerability to demand cycles:

  • Volumes down 8-10% during destocking
  • Healthcare segment particularly volatile
  • Consumer demand in developed markets weak
  • Limited ability to offset volume with price

Kill Zone: Another destocking cycle during integration would stress cash flows.

Counter-evidence: Destocking appears complete; FY25 volumes recovering.

Risk Matrix Summary

Risk Probability Impact Monitoring Signal
Merger integration Medium Very High Synergy realization reports
Commodity pricing High High Gross margin trends
Sustainability regulation Medium-High High EU/US packaging legislation
Dividend sustainability Medium Medium-High FCF vs dividend payout
Demand volatility Medium Medium Quarterly volume trends

Phase 2: Financial Analysis

Income Statement Trends (5-Year)

Fiscal Year Revenue Gross Profit Op. Income Op. Margin Net Income Net Margin
2025* $15.0B $2.8B $1.0B 6.7% $0.5B 3.4%
2024 $13.6B $2.7B $1.2B 8.9% $0.7B 5.4%
2023 $14.7B $2.7B $1.5B 10.3% $1.1B 7.1%
2022 $14.5B $2.8B $1.2B 8.5% $0.8B 5.5%
2021 $12.9B $2.7B $1.3B 10.3% $0.9B 7.3%

*FY2025 includes partial Berry Global contribution

Key Observations:

  • Revenue flat to declining organically (FY21-24)
  • Margins volatile and compressing (10.3% → 6.7% operating)
  • Net income inconsistent ($0.5B-$1.1B range)
  • No operating leverage - costs rise with revenue

Balance Sheet Analysis

Metric FY2025* FY2024 Trend
Total Assets $37.1B $16.5B Berry merger
Total Equity $11.7B $3.9B Dilution
Total Debt $14.1B $6.7B Doubled
Cash $0.8B $0.6B Minimal
Net Debt $13.3B $6.1B Concerning
Debt/Equity 1.2x 1.7x Improved by equity raise
Debt/EBITDA ~5.3x ~2.7x Elevated

*Post-merger

Balance Sheet Grade: C+

  • Significant leverage post-merger
  • Minimal cash cushion
  • Goodwill/intangibles likely substantial (not shown)
  • No margin of safety for adverse scenarios

Cash Flow Analysis

Fiscal Year Operating CF CapEx Free Cash Flow FCF Margin
2025 $1.39B $0.58B $0.81B 5.4%
2024 $1.32B $0.49B $0.83B 6.1%
2023 $1.26B $0.53B $0.73B 5.0%
2022 $1.53B $0.53B $1.00B 6.9%
2021 $1.46B $0.47B $0.99B 7.7%

Cash Flow Observations:

  • FCF relatively stable at $0.7-1.0B
  • FCF margin declining (7.7% → 5.4%)
  • CapEx ~3-4% of revenue (maintenance-level)
  • OCF/Net Income ratio >1.5x (good cash conversion)

Capital Allocation

Use of Cash FY2025 Priority
Dividends $0.84B #1 - Sacred cow
CapEx $0.58B #2 - Maintenance
Debt Service TBD #3 - Mandatory
Buybacks $0 Not prioritized
M&A Berry deal Transformational

Capital Allocation Grade: C

  • Dividend consumes 100% of FCF
  • No capital return flexibility
  • Debt paydown will compete with dividends
  • No growth investment capability

Return on Capital

Metric Current 5-Year Avg Buffett Test
ROE 7.5% ~8% FAIL (<15%)
ROA 3.6% ~4% Poor
ROIC (est.) ~6% ~7% Below WACC?

This is the critical failure point. ROE of 7.5% means every dollar retained earns below-market returns. The business does not compound capital effectively.

Phase 3: Moat Analysis

Moat Type: NARROW (Weak)

1. SWITCHING COSTS (Limited)

Strength: WEAK-MODERATE

Some switching costs exist:

  • FDA/regulatory approvals for pharmaceutical packaging
  • Customer qualification processes take 12-18 months
  • Co-located manufacturing for some customers
  • But: Most packaging is commodity, easily switched

Durability: LOW. Switching costs don't create pricing power.

2. SCALE ECONOMIES (Limited)

Strength: MODERATE

Post-Berry merger, Amcor is the largest packaging company:

  • Procurement leverage on raw materials
  • Manufacturing footprint optimization
  • But: Competitors (Sealed Air, Sonoco, Berry pre-merger) have similar scale
  • Industry fragmented with many regional players

Durability: LOW-MODERATE. Scale provides cost advantage but not pricing power.

3. COST ADVANTAGES

Strength: WEAK

No structural cost advantages:

  • Same raw materials as competitors
  • Similar labor costs
  • Manufacturing technology widely available
  • No proprietary processes

Durability: LOW. Cost position can be replicated.

4. INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Strength: WEAK

  • No meaningful brand premium
  • Patents on packaging designs provide limited protection
  • Customer relationships important but not exclusive

Moat Durability Assessment

Moat Source Current Strength 5-Year Outlook Risk Level
Switching costs Weak-Moderate Weak High
Scale Moderate Moderate Medium
Cost advantages Weak Weak High
Intangibles Weak Weak High

Overall Moat Grade: NARROW / NONE

This is a commodity business masquerading as a moaty business. The "customer lock-in" cited in the shortlist is overstated - it applies mainly to pharmaceutical packaging (~15% of revenue), not the bulk of the business.

Competitor Comparison

Metric Amcor Sealed Air Sonoco Ball Corp
Revenue $15B $5.5B $7B $14B
Op. Margin 7% 15% 10% 11%
ROE 7.5% 35% 15% 25%
Debt/Equity 1.2x 2.5x 1.0x 1.5x

Amcor has the worst margins and returns of the peer group despite being the largest.

Phase 4: Decision Synthesis & Valuation

Valuation Framework

Current Metrics:

  • Price: $8.27
  • Market Cap: $19.1B
  • EV: ~$32B (including $13B net debt)
  • P/E (Trailing): 27.6x
  • P/E (Forward): 10.5x
  • EV/EBITDA: 15.9x
  • Dividend Yield: 6.2%
  • FCF Yield: ~4.2%

Why Forward P/E Looks Cheap

The forward P/E of 10.5x reflects:

  1. Berry synergies boosting earnings
  2. Recovery from FY24 destocking trough
  3. Management guidance of $0.72-0.76 EPS

But this assumes flawless execution on a complex merger during industry headwinds.

Earnings Power Valuation

Scenario FY26 EPS Multiple Fair Value vs Current
Bear $0.55 10x $5.50 -33%
Base $0.72 12x $8.64 +4%
Bull $0.85 14x $11.90 +44%

Base Case Assumptions:

  • Synergies 70% achieved
  • Volumes flat
  • No dividend cut
  • Margins stabilize at 8%

The Buffett Test

Criterion Assessment Pass/Fail
Understandable business Packaging - simple PASS
Consistent earnings No - volatile, cyclical FAIL
Favorable long-term prospects Mature industry, ESG headwinds FAIL
Honest management Reasonable PASS
ROE > 15% 7.5% - significantly below FAIL
Attractive price Not cheap enough for quality FAIL
Margin of safety Minimal with leverage FAIL

Buffett Test Score: 2/7 - REJECT

Investment Decision Matrix

Factor Weight Score (1-10) Weighted
Business Quality 25% 4 1.00
Moat Durability 20% 3 0.60
Financial Strength 15% 4 0.60
Management 15% 5 0.75
Valuation 15% 5 0.75
Risk Profile 10% 4 0.40
Total 100% - 4.10

Final Verdict

REJECT

Rating: 4.1/10 - Low Quality, Value Trap Risk

Why This Is Not a Buffett-Style Investment

  1. ROE of 7.5% is disqualifying. Buffett requires 15%+. Every dollar retained earns sub-par returns.

  2. Commodity economics. No pricing power, thin margins, capital-intensive.

  3. Dividend trap. The 6.2% yield is funded by 100% of FCF with $14B debt. This is not sustainable capital return - it's financial engineering.

  4. Integration risk. Berry merger adds complexity during an already challenging period.

  5. No growth. Organic revenue declining in mature markets. Sustainability regulations are a headwind, not a tailwind.

The Bear Case

  • Merger synergies disappoint → earnings miss → dividend cut → stock falls 30%+
  • Plastic packaging regulation accelerates → structural decline
  • Recession hits consumer spending → volumes decline → operating deleverage
  • Rising rates increase debt service burden → FCF squeezed

The Bull Case (Why Someone Might Buy)

  • 6.2% yield with monthly income
  • Merger synergies exceed targets
  • Defensive staples exposure
  • Trading at 10.5x forward earnings
  • Analyst target of $10.82 (+31%)

If You Must Own Packaging...

Better alternatives exist:

  • Ball Corp (BALL): Higher margins, aluminum (more recyclable), better returns
  • Sealed Air (SEE): 35% ROE, less commodity-like
  • Avoid AMCR unless dividend yield exceeds 8% with demonstrated synergy execution

Action Plan

Price Level Action Rationale
$8.27 (current) PASS No margin of safety
$7.00-7.50 PASS Still too risky
$6.00-6.50 REVIEW 8%+ yield may compensate
$5.00 Consider Only if merger succeeding

Key Monitoring Metrics (If on Watchlist)

  1. Synergy realization updates (quarterly)
  2. FCF coverage of dividend (must stay >1.0x)
  3. Debt/EBITDA trajectory (target <3x)
  4. Organic volume growth (needs to turn positive)
  5. Operating margin recovery (target >10%)

Appendix: Key Data Points

Current Valuation Snapshot

Metric Value
Price $8.27
52-Week High $10.45
52-Week Low $7.67
% Off High -21%
Market Cap $19.1B
Enterprise Value ~$32B
P/E (TTM) 27.6x
P/E (Forward) 10.5x
EV/EBITDA 15.9x
Dividend Yield 6.2%

Segment Mix (Pre-Berry)

Segment Revenue % Margin Trend
Flexibles ~80% 13-15% Stable
Rigid Packaging ~20% 8-9% Declining

Geographic Mix

Region Revenue %
North America ~45%
Europe ~25%
Asia Pacific ~20%
Latin America ~10%

Analysis completed December 24, 2025 Data sources: AlphaVantage, EODHD, company earnings transcripts