Introduction

The 2024/2025 Livestock Benchmarking exercise, covering farms across the Eastern Cape, provides a snapshot of a year that rewarded resilience in South African livestock production. The farms in this study are extensive, operating under a wide range of production systems and environments, from 450 mm to 840 mm rainfall areas and stocking rates stretching from 6 ha/LSU to 2 ha/LSU. Over the July 2024 to June 2025 period, farmers navigated rising input costs, seasonal variability, and shifting market dynamics, all while broader economic and geopolitical conditions added further uncertainty.

Despite these challenges, many operations leaned into the fundamentals by aligning stocking rates with pasture availability, improving veld utilisation, tightening cost structures, and maintaining reproductive performance under variable seasonal conditions. At the same time, industry conversations continued to emphasise the importance of collaboration, data driven decision making, and building systems that remain profitable under pressure.

Alongside overall trends, we benchmark against the top performers on return on total assets (ROTA) and cost of production (COP), as these farms illustrate what is achievable when efficiency, grazing management, and disciplined cost control align. This approach highlights not only what is typical across extensive livestock systems, but also what is possible.

Livestock benchmarking acts as a business health check, offering an independent review of both physical and financial performance. In this report, we unpack the key trends revealed in the 2024/2025 results and explore what they mean for livestock businesses planning ahead.

“The analysis was comprehensive and highlighted a few blind spots. The data shows clearly where to improve, and the study group continues to give us valuable aiming points.”

Physical KPIs: What Drives Performance

Physical performance indicators show how effectively livestock farms convert their resources into saleable product (meat and fibre). In the 2024/2025 livestock benchmarking cycle, participating farms operated across diverse landscapes, rainfall zones, and grazing capacities. This variation makes physical livestock benchmarking essential for identifying which systems use their resources most efficiently, and for understanding why some operations consistently outperform others under similar environmental constraints.

Key metrics we measured:

• Stocking Efficiency – Understanding how well farms match animal numbers to grazing capacity.
• Pasture Harvest – Tracking how much dry matter is grown and consumed, and how efficiently pasture energy is directed toward production rather than maintenance.
• Product Output – Measuring kilograms of liveweight produced per hectare, reflecting land productivity.
• Reproductive Performance – Key indicators such as conception, scanning, marking, and weaning percentages across cattle, sheep, and goats, helping assess herd and flock efficiency.
• Labour Efficiency – LSU per labour unit, providing insight into how effectively farms deploy labour in extensive production systems.

*Per 100mm Water metrics account for different rainfall zones for each farm

What we saw:

• Stocking efficiency
  Stocking rate increased by 9% year on year, as more farms aligned their stocking pressure with improved pasture conditions and seasonal opportunities. The top 25% performers stocked roughly 15 – 20% higher than the average, even when adjusted for rainfall (LSU/ha/100mm). This gap signals that with good grazing management and veld recovery, many farmers could sustainably carry more livestock.
• Pasture harvest
  Pasture harvest increased by 18%, giving farms more dry matter to convert into saleable kilograms. This was one of the strongest improvements across all physical KPIs. The lowest cost producers harvested around 30% more pasture than the average, showing that maintaining tight feed cost control in extensive systems is strongly linked to sound grazing practices. While the gap is tighter when normalised for rainfall (kg DM/ha/100mm), a 20% difference between the average and top groups suggests that management, not rainfall, is the key differentiator.
• Product produced
  Kg product per hectare increased by 15% year on year, mirroring gains in pasture harvest and slightly higher stocking rates. The top 25% farms produced noticeably more kg/ha than the average, a function of improved pasture harvest and better conversion of pasture into kg of liveweight. When viewed per 100 mm rainfall, top performers again outpaced the average.
• Reproduction performance
  Reproductive performance through to weaning remained relatively stable across species, with only small year on year shifts. Despite marginal declines at conception/scanning, marking and weaning percentages showed good resilience, reflecting effective management through lambing and calving. Top performers did not distinguish themselves through reproduction this year. However, they did achieve better consistency: fewer dips between scanning/conception and weaning, indicating well aligned nutrition rather than dramatically higher percentages.

Overall, the results show that the biggest shifts in physical performance came from improvements in stocking rate, pasture harvest, and product produced per hectare. Reproduction remained steady across the group and did not materially drive the gap between average and top performers. Its impact is more delayed, with gains or losses only reflected in the next season’s stocking, output, and financial returns. As a result, the strongest performers this year were those who managed grazing pressure, utilized more pasture, and converted that feed more efficiently into product. These physical efficiencies are not just operational wins, they form part of the foundation for profitable livestock farming. In the next section, we explore how these factors translate into financial performance.

Financial KPIs: A Year of Improved Margins

Financial performance in 2024/2025 showed a clear strengthening across the group, supported by higher income and disciplined cost management. Despite rising input costs in several categories, most farms expanded gross margin, improved Earnings Before Interest and Tax (EBIT) per LSU and per hectare and delivered stronger returns on capital than the previous year. Benchmarking against the top 25% of both high-return and lowest-cost producers highlights how operational efficiency and cost discipline combined to reward resilience in extensive livestock systems.

*Top 25% refers to the lowest cost of production farms in the 2024/2025 benchmarking group.

What we saw:

• Income Boosted as Stronger Physical Output Meets Firm Market Prices
  Total farm income increased by 6% year on year (R4 748 → R5 034 per LSU), supported by both improved physical performance and generally firmer livestock and fibre prices. Across the Enterprises within the Pinion group:
  • Meat prices strengthened modestly, with beef (+3%) and sheep (+7%) both improving year on year driven by sustained demand.
  • Fibre prices were mixed with wool strengthening (+4%) following a subdued prior season, while mohair softened (-8%), after a strong 23/24 year.
• Variable and Overhead Costs: Rising Pressures, Clear Efficiency Differences
  Both increased this year, but what stands out is the widening gap between the average farm and the most cost-efficient producers.
  • Variable Costs rose, driven by two major contributors:
    • Animal health costs increased 24% year on year for the average farm, suggesting higher disease pressure, while the top producers spent up to 17% less than the average, supported by stronger physical performance.
    • Feed costs were up 11% for the average, but the spread between the top groups was interesting:
      • Top 25% ROTA performers spent 27% more, but converted this investment into stronger income and EBIT, indicating strategic supplementary feeding aligned with production goals.
      • Top 25% COP farms (lowest-cost producers) spent almost 60% less, reflecting strong veld utilisation, optimal stocking rates, and lower reliance on supplements.
  • Overhead Costs (OHC) also rose meaningfully:
    • Repairs & maintenance increased 26% for the average farm, while Top 25% ROTA producers spent 29% more, signalling purposeful reinvestment that supports higher physical output. Lowest cost producers held R&M 20% lower, perhaps benefitting from simpler systems.
• How Cost Structure Shapes Profitability
  The Income vs COP vs EBIT comparison makes the relationship between cost discipline and profitability clear: The average saw rising COP absorb much of the additional income, dampening gains. Top 25% ROTA farms likely used targeted spending (feed, infrastructure) to drive higher productivity and stronger EBIT while top 25% COP farms achieved EBIT similar to ROTA farms despite lower income, simply by keeping COP substantially lower.
• EBIT/ha Highlights the Real Story: Land Use Efficiency Drives Profit
  While EBIT per LSU increased steadily this year, the EBIT per hectare trend tells the more powerful story: the most profitable farms are those that make the best use of their land, not necessarily those with the highest per animal margin. Average EBIT/LSU rose from R1 794 → R1 966, reflecting improved margins at the animal level, but EBIT/ha increased far more sharply, from R567 → R676 (+19%). Both top 25% groups (ROTA and COP) were 34% higher than the average, where EBIT/ha fell above R900/ha. This widening gap between EBIT/LSU and EBIT/ha in the top performers demonstrates that the strongest businesses optimise production per hectare, not just per animal.
• Returns Improve as Stronger EBIT Flows Through
  ROTA strengthened from 3.4% → 3.9% this year, reflecting the combined effect of higher income and improved output. While the increase is modest, it marks a continued recovery after several challenging seasons. The top performers achieved returns of above 5%, supported by better land use efficiency and tighter alignment between stocking rate and grazing capacity.

Conclusion

As South African livestock farmers continue to navigate rising input costs, climatic variability, and shifting market conditions, livestock benchmarking remains far more than a comparative exercise, it is a strategic management tool. The most consistent performers in this year’s study were farms that executed their production system with discipline, adapted proactively, and aligned decisions with their resource base.

This year’s results reaffirm that efficiency, resilience, and land use optimisation are the cornerstones of long-term success in extensive livestock systems. Gains in stocking rate, pasture harvest, and kilograms produced per hectare, combined with disciplined cost structures, drove meaningful improvements in profitability. Importantly, the top performers were spread across a variety of rainfall zones, veld types, and enterprise mixes. What unites them is not their environment, but their ability to consistently implement fundamentals: matching stocking rate to grazing capacity, utilising more of their pasture, converting that pasture into saleable product, maintaining reproductive performance and managing costs relative to output.

Looking ahead, continuous learning, open collaboration, and a willingness to test one’s assumptions will be critical in unlocking fresh opportunities. With uncertainty becoming a constant, livestock benchmarking offers a clear, objective lens to guide planning, sharpen execution, and track progress year on year.

Take the next step and contact us:

We welcome your feedback and if you would like a customised livestock benchmarking report, deeper analysis of your physical or financial KPIs, or support in refining your grazing or business strategy, please reach out to our team. Together, we can build livestock enterprises that are more competitive, more resilient, and better prepared for the seasons ahead.

Visit our website or contact info@pinionza.com for more information.