FMX vs WMT vs KO vs COST

For growth investors, Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is the stronger pick with 8.

2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -94. 8% for Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. (FMX). Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. (FMX) offers the better valuation at 4. 4x trailing P/E (1. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. (FMX) a "Buy" — based on 11 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.

On trailing P/E, Fomento Económico Mexicano, S.

A. B. de C. V. (FMX) is the cheapest at 4. 4x versus Costco Wholesale Corporation at 55. 6x. On forward P/E, Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. is actually cheaper at 1. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: The Coca-Cola Company wins at 2. 16x versus Walmart Inc. 's 4. 06x.

Over the past 5 years, Walmart Inc.

(WMT) delivered a total return of +186. 9%, compared to +61. 1% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: COST returned +625. 0% versus FMX's +63. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.

09β versus Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. 's 0. 34β — meaning FMX is approximately -491% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 28% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is pulling ahead at 8.

2% versus -94. 8% for Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. (FMX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to -96. 3% for Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V.. Over a 3-year CAGR, COST leads at 6. 6% 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.

The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.

3% net margin versus 2. 3% for Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 3. 8% for COST. 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.

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, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 16x versus Walmart Inc. 's 4. 06x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. (FMX) trades at 1. 4x forward P/E versus 49. 5x for Costco Wholesale Corporation — 48. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KO: 9. 3% to $85. 71.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. (FMX) offers the highest yield at 64. 8%, versus 0. 5% for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Walmart Inc.

(WMT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 12), 0. 7% yield, +499. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WMT: +499. 5%, FMX: +63. 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.

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: FMX is a small-cap deep-value stock; WMT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; COST is a large-cap quality compounder stock. FMX, WMT, KO pay a dividend while COST 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.