Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) vs PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | MNST | 10.7% revenue growth vs PEP's 2.3% |
| Value | MNST | PEG 4.69 vs 6.03 |
| Quality / Margins | MNST | 23.0% net margin vs PEP's 8.8% |
| Stability / Safety | PEP | Beta 0.14 vs MNST's 0.30 |
| Dividends | PEP | 3.3% yield; 25-year raise streak; MNST pays no meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | MNST | +56.1% vs PEP's +14.3% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | MNST | 19.1% ROA vs PEP's 7.7%, ROIC 33.1% vs 14.9% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Valuation efficiency (growth/$)
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
Monster Beverage is a leading energy drink company that develops, markets, and sells a wide range of energy beverages globally. It generates revenue primarily through its Monster Energy Drinks segment — which accounts for the vast majority of sales — along with its Strategic Brands portfolio and other beverage offerings. The company's moat lies in its powerful Monster Energy brand, extensive distribution network, and strong relationships with bottlers and retailers that create significant barriers to entry.
PepsiCo is a global food and beverage giant that sells iconic snack brands like Lay's and Doritos alongside its namesake soft drinks. It generates revenue primarily through its Frito-Lay North America snacks division (~50% of operating profit) and its beverage business, with the rest coming from international markets and Quaker Foods. The company's competitive moat lies in its massive scale, powerful distribution network, and portfolio of deeply entrenched household brands that command strong consumer loyalty.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
MNST leads in 3 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). PEP leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility).
Financial Metrics (TTM)
PEP is the larger business by revenue, generating $93.9B annually — 11.3x MNST's $8.3B. MNST is the more profitable business, keeping 23.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PEP's 8.8%. On growth, MNST holds the edge at +17.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | MNSTMonster Beverage … | PEPPepsiCo, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $8.3B | $93.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.5B | $14.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.9B | $8.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | $7.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +55.8% | +54.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +29.2% | +12.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +23.0% | +8.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +8.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +17.6% | +5.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +64.3% | +66.7% |
Valuation Metrics
At 28.3x trailing earnings, PEP trades at a 36% valuation discount to MNST's 44.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MNST offers better value at 5.49x vs PEP's 8.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | MNSTMonster Beverage … | PEPPepsiCo, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $83.4B | $232.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $81.3B | $272.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 43.97x | 28.29x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 37.51x | 19.68x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 5.49x | 8.67x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 33.62x | 19.07x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 10.06x | 2.47x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 10.11x | 11.33x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 30.24x |
Profitability & Efficiency
PEP delivers a 40.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $40 in annual profit, vs $23 for MNST.
| Metric | MNSTMonster Beverage … | PEPPepsiCo, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +23.1% | +40.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +19.1% | +7.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +33.1% | +14.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +31.9% | +16.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 2.43x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2.1B | $40.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.1B | $9.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $49.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 299.84x | 10.34x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in MNST five years ago would be worth $19,484 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,884 for PEP. Over the past 12 months, MNST leads with a +56.1% total return vs PEP's +14.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MNST at 18.8% vs PEP's 2.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | MNSTMonster Beverage … | PEPPepsiCo, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +12.0% | +19.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +56.1% | +14.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +67.6% | +7.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +94.8% | +48.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +307.7% | +116.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +18.8% | +2.3% |
Risk & Volatility
PEP is the less volatile stock with a 0.14 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MNST's 0.30 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | MNSTMonster Beverage … | PEPPepsiCo, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.30x | 0.14x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $87.36 | $171.48 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $53.90 | $127.60 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.6% | +99.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 72.4 | 65.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.7M | 7.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates MNST as "Buy" and PEP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply -1.2% upside for PEP (target: $168) vs -1.6% for MNST (target: $84). PEP is the only dividend payer here at 3.28% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | MNSTMonster Beverage … | PEPPepsiCo, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $83.92 | $167.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 43 | 44 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 25 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $5.57 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.4% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Mar 20 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) | 100 | 250.46 | +150.5% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 100 | 112.81 | +12.8% |
Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) returned +95% over 5 years vs PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP)'s +49%. A $10,000 investment in MNST 5 years ago would be worth $19,484 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) | $3.0B | $8.3B | +172.0% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | $62.8B | $93.9B | +49.6% |
Monster Beverage Corporation's revenue grew from $3.0B (2016) to $8.3B (2025) — a 11.8% CAGR. PepsiCo, Inc.'s revenue grew from $62.8B (2016) to $93.9B (2025) — a 4.6% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) | 23.4% | 23.0% | -1.7% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 10.1% | 8.8% | -13.0% |
Monster Beverage Corporation's net margin went from 23% (2016) to 23% (2025). PepsiCo, Inc.'s net margin went from 10% (2016) to 9% (2025).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 9 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) | 44.6 | 39.5 | -11.4% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 35.5 | 23.9 | -32.7% |
Monster Beverage Corporation has traded in a 28x–45x P/E range over 9 years; current trailing P/E is ~44x. PepsiCo, Inc. has traded in a 13x–36x P/E range over 9 years; current trailing P/E is ~28x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) | 0.6 | 1.94 | +223.3% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 4.36 | 6 | +37.6% |
Monster Beverage Corporation's EPS grew from $0.60 (2016) to $1.94 (2025) — a 14% CAGR. PepsiCo, Inc.'s EPS grew from $4.36 (2016) to $6.00 (2025) — a 4% CAGR.
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
Monster Beverage Corporation generated $0M FCF in 2025 (-100% vs 2021). PepsiCo, Inc. generated $8B FCF in 2025 (+10% vs 2021).
MNST vs PEP: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MNST or PEP a better buy right now?
PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) offers the better valuation at 28.3x trailing P/E (19.7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) a "Buy" — based on 43 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — MNST or PEP?
On trailing P/E, PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) is the cheapest at 28.3x versus Monster Beverage Corporation at 44.0x. On forward P/E, PepsiCo, Inc. is actually cheaper at 19.7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Monster Beverage Corporation wins at 4.69x versus PepsiCo, Inc.'s 6.03x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MNST or PEP?
Over the past 5 years, Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) delivered a total return of +94.8%, compared to +48.8% for PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP). A $10,000 investment in MNST five years ago would be worth approximately $19K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MNST returned +307.7% versus PEP's +116.7%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — MNST or PEP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) is the lower-risk stock at 0.14β versus Monster Beverage Corporation's 0.30β — meaning MNST is approximately 111% more volatile than PEP relative to the S&P 500.
05Which has better profit margins — MNST or PEP?
Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) is the more profitable company, earning 23.0% net margin versus 8.8% for PepsiCo, Inc. — meaning it keeps 23.0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MNST leads at 29.2% versus 12.2% for PEP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MNST leads at 55.8%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
06Is MNST or PEP more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential. By this metric, Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 4.69x versus PepsiCo, Inc.'s 6.03x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) trades at 19.7x forward P/E versus 37.5x for Monster Beverage Corporation — 17.8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PEP: -1.2% to $167.75.
07Which pays a better dividend — MNST or PEP?
In this comparison, PEP (3.3% yield) pays a dividend. MNST does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is MNST or PEP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.14), 3.3% yield, +116.7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PEP: +116.7%, MNST: +307.7%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
09What are the main differences between MNST and PEP?
Both stocks operate in the Consumer Defensive sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. In terms of investment character: MNST is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PEP is a large-cap income-oriented stock. PEP pays a dividend while MNST does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that beat both.