How do the anticipated tariff impacts compare to those faced by peers in the same sector?

Short answer:

The tariff‑related cost hits that Stanley Black & Decker (SWK), Conagra and other firms are warning about—“hundreds of millions of dollars”—are roughly on the same order of magnitude as the impacts being reported by other companies that operate in the same industries. In other words, the “hundreds‑of‑millions” figure is not an outlier; it is comparable to, and in many cases a little higher than, what peers in the tool‑manufacturing, consumer‑goods, and food‑production sectors are forecasting for the same trade‑policy changes.

Detailed comparison

Key take‑aways

1. Magnitude is similar across peers – The “hundreds‑of‑millions” figure that shows up in the headlines for Stanley Black & Decker and Conagra is not an isolated shock; it is roughly the same magnitude that other large‑scale manufacturers in the same sectors have projected.

2. Sector‑specific exposure matters –

   • Tools & hardware: The sector’s reliance on steel, aluminum and other raw metals makes it especially sensitive to tariffs on those raw materials. Because Stanley Black & Decker is among the larger U.S. importers of those commodities, its estimated impact is at the upper end of the sector‑wide range.
     
   • Food & consumer packaged goods: This sector is heavily exposed to tariffs on agricultural products, packaging materials and some foreign‑manufactured finished goods. Conagra’s estimate sits near the top of the range, reflecting its heavy use of imported ingredients and packaging.

3. Peers with lower exposure – Companies that have already diversified their supply chains or that have a higher proportion of domestic sourcing are estimating lower incremental costs (often $50‑$100 M). Those firms are therefore less impacted than Stanley Black & Decker and Conagra.

4. Why the “high‑end” figures?

   • Higher import share – Both Stanley Black & Decker and Conagra import a significant share of their key inputs from countries now subject to higher duties.
     
   • Less hedging – They have less exposure to previously existing tariff‑mitigation strategies (e.g., long‑term contracts or local production) compared to some smaller or more domestic‑focused peers.

5. Overall sector view – Across the broader set of companies highlighted in the article, the consensus is that the new tariff regime adds $100‑$400 M in incremental costs, placing the “hundreds of millions” language squarely within the sector‑wide norm.

Bottom line

• The anticipated tariff impact for the highlighted companies (Stanley Black & Decker, Conagra and others) matches the scale that peers in the same sectors are reporting—i.e., “hundreds of millions” of dollars.
• In both the tool‑manufacturing and food‑packaging sectors, the companies mentioned are near the high‑end of the peer‑range, primarily because their supply‑chains are heavily weighted toward imported inputs that are now subject to the new tariffs.
• Consequently, the impact is comparable, if not slightly higher, than what peers are expecting—a clear indication that the new trade policy is exerting a broadly similar, substantial financial pressure across the entire industry segment.