Software - Application
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CYN vs ZVIA vs CELH vs LIDR vs MNST vs JPM vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Auto - Parts
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Diversified
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
CYN vs ZVIA vs CELH vs LIDR vs MNST vs JPM vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Auto - Parts | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Diversified | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $14M | $100M | $7.46B | $74M | $90.79B | $896.00B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $276K | $169M | $2.97B | $270K | $8.79B | $280.33B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-26M | $-7M | $174M | $-34M | $2.03B | $57.05B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 34.4% | 47.1% | 49.6% | -144.1% | 55.5% | 60.0% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | -99.2% | -3.3% | 10.4% | -125.8% | 29.3% | 25.9% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 17.8x | — | 40.5x | 14.4x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $7M | $668K | $670M | $235K | $0.00 | $942.38B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $990K | $25M | $399M | $43M | $2.09B | $343.34B | $10.27B |
CYN vs ZVIA vs CELH vs LIDR vs MNST vs JPM vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cyngn Inc. (CYN) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| Zevia PBC (ZVIA) | 100 | 13.2 | -86.8% |
| Celsius Holdings, I… (CELH) | 100 | 90.7 | -9.3% |
| AEye, Inc. (LIDR) | 100 | 1.0 | -99.0% |
| Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) | 100 | 218.4 | +118.4% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 188.8 | +88.8% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 146.6 | +46.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CYN vs ZVIA vs CELH vs LIDR vs MNST vs JPM vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CYN doesn't hold a clear category lead here; it's more of a secondary option in this specific comparison.
ZVIA is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.92, Low D/E 1.9%, current ratio 2.08x
CELH ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.38 vs MNST's 5.06
- 85.5% revenue growth vs CYN's -40.5%
LIDR is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 15.3%, EPS growth 79.9%, 3Y rev CAGR -60.0%
- +86.2% vs CYN's -72.6%
MNST has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in defensive.
- Beta 0.29, current ratio 3.70x
- Beta 0.29 vs LIDR's 2.51
- 20.7% ROA vs LIDR's -48.5%, ROIC 33.1% vs -100.7%
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.9%
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs CELH's 34.2%
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.26
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and dividends is your priority.
- 27.8% margin vs LIDR's -127.0%
- 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (4 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 85.5% revenue growth vs CYN's -40.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs LIDR's -127.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.29 vs LIDR's 2.51 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (4 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +86.2% vs CYN's -72.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 20.7% ROA vs LIDR's -48.5%, ROIC 33.1% vs -100.7% |
CYN vs ZVIA vs CELH vs LIDR vs MNST vs JPM vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
CYN vs ZVIA vs CELH vs LIDR vs MNST vs JPM vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 7 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories
JPM leads 2 • MNST leads 1 • CYN leads 0 • ZVIA leads 0 • CELH leads 0 • LIDR leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 1038270.4x LIDR's $270,000. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LIDR's -127.0%. On growth, CELH holds the edge at +137.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $276,397 | $169M | $3.0B | $270,000 | $8.8B | $280.3B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$26M | -$5M | $345M | -$34M | $2.7B | $81.4B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$26M | -$7M | $174M | -$34M | $2.0B | $57.0B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$27M | -$703,000 | $293M | -$29M | $2.1B | $100.9B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.4% | +47.1% | +49.6% | -144.1% | +55.5% | +60.0% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -99.2% | -3.3% | +10.4% | -125.8% | +29.3% | +25.9% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -94.2% | -4.1% | +5.9% | -127.0% | +23.1% | +20.4% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -97.1% | -0.4% | +9.9% | -106.7% | +23.6% | +36.0% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +121.8% | +21.2% | +137.7% | +57.8% | +26.9% | — | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +91.1% | +62.5% | +120.0% | -63.6% | +28.9% | +16.0% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
JPM leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 86% valuation discount to CELH's 116.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs MNST's 5.98x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $14M | $100M | $7.5B | $74M | $90.8B | $896.0B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $19M | $75M | $7.7B | $31M | $88.7B | $1.50T | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.24x | -9.87x | 116.72x | -1.78x | 47.85x | 16.00x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 17.81x | — | 40.52x | 14.40x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.50x | — | 5.98x | 0.90x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 15.52x | — | 35.01x | 18.36x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 62.34x | 0.62x | 2.97x | 318.04x | 10.95x | 3.20x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.15x | 2.74x | 2.35x | 0.74x | 11.07x | 2.47x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 23.07x | — | 46.18x | 8.88x | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MNST leads this category, winning 7 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 $-60 for CYN. LIDR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MNST scores 7/9 vs CYN's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -59.6% | -19.6% | +7.5% | -56.2% | +25.5% | +15.9% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -48.1% | -11.5% | +3.6% | -48.5% | +20.7% | +1.3% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -117.2% | -58.9% | +19.7% | -100.7% | +33.1% | +4.5% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -71.5% | -24.3% | +17.2% | -64.7% | +31.9% | +8.9% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.18x | 0.02x | 0.23x | 0.00x | — | 2.60x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $6M | -$25M | $271M | -$43M | -$2.1B | $599.0B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $990,023 | $25M | $399M | $43M | $2.1B | $343.3B | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $7M | $668,000 | $670M | $235,000 | $0 | $942.4B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -59.79x | — | 4.07x | -80.57x | 814.22x | 0.74x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $0 for CYN. Over the past 12 months, LIDR leads with a +86.2% total return vs CYN's -72.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs CYN's -95.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -54.9% | -26.4% | -38.9% | -24.2% | +21.9% | -0.5% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -72.6% | -48.6% | -30.5% | +86.2% | +45.8% | +21.8% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -68.3% | -39.3% | -70.4% | +60.3% | +138.2% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -89.2% | +35.6% | -99.5% | +98.8% | +118.2% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -89.2% | +3415.7% | -99.5% | +269.4% | +465.8% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -95.5% | -31.8% | -15.3% | -33.4% | +17.0% | +33.6% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MNST and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LIDR's 2.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MNST currently trades 99.7% from its 52-week high vs CYN's 3.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.18x | 0.92x | 1.09x | 2.51x | 0.29x | 0.94x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $41.54 | $3.66 | $66.74 | $6.44 | $93.08 | $337.25 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.22 | $1.11 | $27.47 | $0.71 | $58.09 | $262.71 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +3.0% | +40.4% | +43.7% | +24.8% | +99.7% | +95.1% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.0 | 47.6 | 40.0 | 36.7 | 70.0 | 59.1 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 277K | 761K | 8.9M | 3.4M | 5.0M | 7.0M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ZVIA as "Buy", CELH as "Buy", LIDR as "Hold", MNST as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 650.0% upside for LIDR (target: $12) vs -2.4% for MNST (target: $91). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.46% vs CELH's 0.54%.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $3.50 | $54.00 | $12.00 | $90.58 | $339.75 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 8 | 23 | 4 | 44 | 61 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.5% | — | — | +1.9% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 15 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.16 | — | — | $5.95 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.5% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +3.9% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). JPM leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 1 tied.
CYN vs ZVIA vs CELH vs LIDR vs MNST vs JPM vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CYN or ZVIA or CELH or LIDR or MNST or JPM or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) is the stronger pick with 85. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -40. 5% for Cyngn Inc. (CYN). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Zevia PBC (ZVIA) a "Buy" — based on 8 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 — CYN or ZVIA or CELH or LIDR or MNST or JPM or KO?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus Celsius Holdings, Inc. at 116. 7x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Celsius Holdings, Inc. wins at 0. 38x versus Monster Beverage Corporation's 5. 06x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CYN or ZVIA or CELH or LIDR or MNST or JPM or KO?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -100. 0% for Cyngn Inc. (CYN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CELH returned +34. 2% versus CYN's -100. 0%. 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 — CYN or ZVIA or CELH or LIDR or MNST or JPM or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus AEye, Inc. 's 2. 51β — meaning LIDR is approximately -1353% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AEye, Inc. (LIDR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CYN or ZVIA or CELH or LIDR or MNST or JPM or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) is pulling ahead at 85. 5% versus -40. 5% for Cyngn Inc. (CYN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: AEye, Inc. grew EPS 79. 9% year-over-year, compared to -44. 4% for Celsius Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CELH leads at 56. 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 — CYN or ZVIA or CELH or LIDR or MNST or JPM or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -145. 7% for AEye, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MNST leads at 29. 2% versus -136. 2% for LIDR. 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 CYN or ZVIA or CELH or LIDR or MNST or JPM or KO 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, Celsius Holdings, Inc. (CELH) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 38x versus Monster Beverage Corporation's 5. 06x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 40. 5x for Monster Beverage Corporation — 26. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LIDR: 650. 0% to $12. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CYN or ZVIA or CELH or LIDR or MNST or JPM or KO?
In this comparison, KO (2.
5% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield), CELH (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. CYN, ZVIA, LIDR, MNST do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CYN or ZVIA or CELH or LIDR or MNST or JPM or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Cyngn Inc. (CYN) carries a higher beta of 2. 18 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, CYN: -100. 0%), 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 CYN and ZVIA and CELH and LIDR and MNST and JPM and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (CYN (Technology) and ZVIA (Consumer Defensive) and CELH (Consumer Defensive) and LIDR (Consumer Cyclical) and MNST (Consumer Defensive) and JPM (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CYN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ZVIA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CELH is a small-cap high-growth stock; LIDR is a small-cap high-growth stock; MNST is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. CELH, JPM, KO pay a dividend while CYN, ZVIA, LIDR, MNST do 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.