Shell Companies
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CCII vs CF vs KO vs PEP vs MOS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Agricultural Inputs
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Agricultural Inputs
CCII vs CF vs KO vs PEP vs MOS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Agricultural Inputs | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Agricultural Inputs |
| Market Cap | $269M | $15.81B | $341.71B | $194.09B | $7.28B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $7.41B | $49.28B | $93.92B | $12.06B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-189.00 | $1.76B | $13.70B | $8.24B | $727M |
| Gross Margin | — | 40.4% | 61.7% | 54.1% | 13.9% |
| Operating Margin | — | 35.7% | 29.3% | 12.2% | 3.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | 6.0x | 24.3x | 16.4x | 27.8x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $3.95B | $45.49B | $49.90B | $5.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $0.00 | $1.98B | $10.27B | $9.16B | $277M |
CCII vs CF vs KO vs PEP vs MOS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 25 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cohen Circle Acquis… (CCII) | 100 | 101.4 | +1.4% |
| CF Industries Holdi… (CF) | 100 | 110.9 | +10.9% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 116.9 | +16.9% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 100 | 103.0 | +3.0% |
| The Mosaic Company (MOS) | 100 | 63.6 | -36.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CCII vs CF vs KO vs PEP vs MOS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CCII ranks third and is worth considering specifically for stability.
- Beta 0.04 vs MOS's 0.73
CF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 19.3%, EPS growth 33.1%, 3Y rev CAGR -14.1%
- 320.7% 10Y total return vs KO's 115.0%
- PEG 0.14 vs PEP's 5.04
- 19.3% revenue growth vs KO's 1.9%
KO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and momentum.
- 27.8% margin vs MOS's 6.0%
- +17.7% vs MOS's -34.7%
- 13.1% ROA vs CCII's -0.7%
PEP is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 54 yrs, beta -0.09, yield 3.9%
- 3.9% yield, 54-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
MOS is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.73, Low D/E 43.2%, current ratio 1.32x
- Beta 0.73, yield 3.8%, current ratio 1.32x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.3% revenue growth vs KO's 1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.0x vs 27.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs MOS's 6.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.04 vs MOS's 0.73 | |
| Dividends | 3.9% yield, 54-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +17.7% vs MOS's -34.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs CCII's -0.7% |
CCII vs CF vs KO vs PEP vs MOS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
CCII vs CF vs KO vs PEP vs MOS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CF leads in 3 of 6 categories
CCII leads 0 • KO leads 0 • PEP leads 0 • MOS leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — CF and KO each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PEP and CCII operate at a comparable scale, with $93.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MOS's 6.0%. On growth, CF holds the edge at +19.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $7.4B | $49.3B | $93.9B | $12.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | $3.5B | $15.5B | $14.3B | $1.2B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | $1.8B | $13.7B | $8.2B | $727M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | $1.6B | $12.6B | $7.7B | -$489M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +40.4% | +61.7% | +54.1% | +13.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +35.7% | +29.3% | +12.2% | +3.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +23.7% | +27.8% | +8.8% | +6.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +21.9% | +25.5% | +8.2% | -4.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +19.4% | +12.1% | +5.6% | +14.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +115.1% | +18.2% | +66.7% | -2.1% |
Valuation Metrics
CF leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.5x trailing earnings, CF trades at a 56% valuation discount to KO's 26.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CF offers better value at 0.26x vs PEP's 7.25x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $269M | $15.8B | $341.7B | $194.1B | $7.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $269M | $17.8B | $376.9B | $234.8B | $12.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | — | 11.47x | 26.12x | 23.67x | 13.47x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 6.01x | 24.27x | 16.43x | 27.85x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.26x | 2.34x | 7.25x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 5.45x | 25.45x | 16.42x | 5.51x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.23x | 7.13x | 2.07x | 0.60x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 2.15x | 9.99x | 9.48x | 0.60x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 8.77x | 64.52x | 25.30x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CF leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-2 for CCII. MOS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.43x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PEP's 2.43x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CF scores 8/9 vs CCII's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.1% | +22.3% | +41.1% | +40.1% | +5.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.7% | +12.4% | +13.1% | +7.7% | +3.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +18.7% | +15.8% | +14.9% | +4.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -172.4% | +18.3% | +17.3% | +16.1% | +5.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.51x | 1.33x | 2.43x | 0.43x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $0 | $2.0B | $35.2B | $40.7B | $5.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $0 | $2.0B | $10.3B | $9.2B | $277M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $3.9B | $45.5B | $49.9B | $5.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 16.31x | 10.70x | 10.34x | 5.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CF leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CF five years ago would be worth $22,875 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,965 for MOS. Over the past 12 months, KO leads with a +17.7% total return vs MOS's -34.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CF at 14.9% vs MOS's -9.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +0.8% | +29.7% | +16.4% | +1.9% | -6.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1.8% | +4.6% | +17.7% | +14.5% | -34.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1.8% | +51.5% | +39.3% | -14.5% | -26.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1.8% | +128.7% | +65.3% | +15.2% | -10.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1.8% | +320.7% | +115.0% | +79.6% | +6.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.6% | +14.9% | +11.7% | -5.1% | -9.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CCII and CF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CF is the less volatile stock with a -0.80 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MOS's 0.73 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CCII currently trades 98.6% from its 52-week high vs MOS's 59.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.04x | -0.80x | -0.23x | -0.09x | 0.73x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.47 | $141.96 | $84.04 | $171.48 | $38.23 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.07 | $75.42 | $65.35 | $127.60 | $19.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.6% | +72.5% | +94.5% | +82.8% | +59.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 64.7 | 36.3 | 49.2 | 38.4 | 50.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 58K | 2.9M | 13.6M | 6.5M | 8.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KO and PEP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CF as "Buy", KO as "Buy", PEP as "Hold", MOS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 22.3% upside for MOS (target: $28) vs 8.5% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, PEP offers the higher dividend yield at 3.92% vs CF's 1.95%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $111.88 | $86.13 | $167.89 | $28.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 41 | 48 | 45 | 49 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.0% | +2.6% | +3.9% | +3.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 56 | 54 | 7 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.01 | $2.04 | $5.57 | $0.88 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.5% | 0.0% |
CF leads in 3 of 6 categories — strongest in Valuation Metrics and Profitability & Efficiency. 3 categories are tied.
CCII vs CF vs KO vs PEP vs MOS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CCII or CF or KO or PEP or MOS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, CF Industries Holdings, Inc.
(CF) is the stronger pick with 19. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). CF Industries Holdings, Inc. (CF) offers the better valuation at 11. 5x trailing P/E (6. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate CF Industries Holdings, Inc. (CF) a "Buy" — based on 41 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 — CCII or CF or KO or PEP or MOS?
On trailing P/E, CF Industries Holdings, Inc.
(CF) is the cheapest at 11. 5x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 26. 1x. On forward P/E, CF Industries Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: CF Industries Holdings, Inc. wins at 0. 14x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 04x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CCII or CF or KO or PEP or MOS?
Over the past 5 years, CF Industries Holdings, Inc.
(CF) delivered a total return of +128. 7%, compared to -10. 4% for The Mosaic Company (MOS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CF returned +320. 7% versus CCII's +1. 8%. 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 — CCII or CF or KO or PEP or MOS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CF Industries Holdings, Inc.
(CF) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 80β versus The Mosaic Company's 0. 73β — meaning MOS is approximately -191% more volatile than CF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Mosaic Company (MOS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 43% versus 2% for PepsiCo, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CCII or CF or KO or PEP or MOS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), CF Industries Holdings, Inc.
(CF) is pulling ahead at 19. 3% versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Mosaic Company grew EPS 209. 1% year-over-year, compared to -13. 7% for PepsiCo, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, KO leads at 3. 7% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — CCII or CF or KO or PEP or MOS?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 0. 0% for Cohen Circle Acquisition Corp. II — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CF leads at 33. 4% versus 0. 0% for CCII. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KO leads at 61. 6%, 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.
07Is CCII or CF or KO or PEP or MOS 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, CF Industries Holdings, Inc. (CF) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 14x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 04x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, CF Industries Holdings, Inc. (CF) trades at 6. 0x forward P/E versus 27. 8x for The Mosaic Company — 21. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MOS: 22. 3% to $28. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CCII or CF or KO or PEP or MOS?
In this comparison, PEP (3.
9% yield), MOS (3. 8% yield), KO (2. 6% yield), CF (2. 0% yield) pay a dividend. CCII does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CCII or CF or KO or PEP or MOS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CF Industries Holdings, Inc.
(CF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 80), 2. 0% yield, +320. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CF: +320. 7%, MOS: +6. 3%), 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.
10What are the main differences between CCII and CF and KO and PEP and MOS?
These companies operate in different sectors (CCII (Financial Services) and CF (Basic Materials) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and PEP (Consumer Defensive) and MOS (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CCII is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CF is a mid-cap high-growth stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; PEP is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; MOS is a small-cap deep-value stock. CF, KO, PEP, MOS pay a dividend while CCII 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.