Beverages - Alcoholic
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FMX vs WMT vs KO vs COST vs PEP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Discount Stores
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
FMX vs WMT vs KO vs COST vs PEP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Beverages - Alcoholic | Specialty Retail | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Discount Stores | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $4.19B | $1.04T | $337.53B | $447.13B | $211.31B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $841.93B | $703.06B | $49.28B | $286.26B | $93.92B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $20.06B | $22.91B | $13.70B | $8.55B | $8.24B |
| Gross Margin | 40.6% | 24.9% | 61.7% | 12.9% | 54.1% |
| Operating Margin | 8.6% | 4.1% | 29.3% | 3.8% | 12.2% |
| Forward P/E | 1.3x | 44.8x | 24.1x | 49.4x | 17.9x |
| Total Debt | $257.98B | $67.09B | $45.49B | $8.17B | $49.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $108.52B | $10.73B | $10.27B | $14.16B | $9.16B |
FMX vs WMT vs KO vs COST vs PEP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fomento Económico M… (FMX) | 100 | 179.0 | +79.0% |
| Walmart Inc. (WMT) | 100 | 315.3 | +215.3% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 168.0 | +68.0% |
| Costco Wholesale Co… (COST) | 100 | 327.0 | +227.0% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 100 | 117.5 | +17.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FMX vs WMT vs KO vs COST vs PEP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FMX has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in value and dividends.
- Lower P/E (1.3x vs 17.9x)
- 64.1% yield, vs WMT's 0.7%
WMT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +35.1% vs COST's +0.6%
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 2.15 vs PEP's 5.47
- 27.8% margin vs FMX's 2.4%
- 13.1% ROA vs FMX's 2.4%, ROIC 15.8% vs 0.6%
COST is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 8.2%, EPS growth 10.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 6.6%
- 6.2% 10Y total return vs WMT's 5.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.10, Low D/E 28.0%, current ratio 1.03x
- 8.2% revenue growth vs FMX's -94.8%
PEP is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 25 yrs, beta 0.02, yield 3.6%
- Beta 0.02, yield 3.6%, current ratio 0.85x
- Beta 0.02 vs FMX's 0.40
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.2% revenue growth vs FMX's -94.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.3x vs 17.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs FMX's 2.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.02 vs FMX's 0.40 | |
| Dividends | 64.1% yield, vs WMT's 0.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +35.1% vs COST's +0.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs FMX's 2.4%, ROIC 15.8% vs 0.6% |
FMX vs WMT vs KO vs COST vs PEP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
FMX vs WMT vs KO vs COST vs PEP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 1 of 6 categories
FMX leads 1 • COST leads 1 • WMT leads 1 • PEP leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FMX is the larger business by revenue, generating $841.9B annually — 17.1x KO's $49.3B. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FMX's 2.4%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $841.9B | $703.1B | $49.3B | $286.3B | $93.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $71.8B | $42.8B | $15.5B | $13.5B | $14.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $20.1B | $22.9B | $13.7B | $8.5B | $8.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $21.3B | $15.3B | $12.6B | $9.1B | $7.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +40.6% | +24.9% | +61.7% | +12.9% | +54.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +8.6% | +4.1% | +29.3% | +3.8% | +12.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +2.4% | +3.3% | +27.8% | +3.0% | +8.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.5% | +2.2% | +25.5% | +3.2% | +8.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.7% | +5.8% | +12.1% | +9.2% | +5.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +21.6% | +35.1% | +18.2% | -2.1% | +66.7% |
Valuation Metrics
FMX leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 4.4x trailing earnings, FMX trades at a 92% valuation discount to COST's 55.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), KO offers better value at 2.31x vs PEP's 7.90x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.2B | $1.04T | $337.5B | $447.1B | $211.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $153.6B | $1.10T | $372.8B | $441.1B | $252.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 4.41x | 47.76x | 25.80x | 55.40x | 25.77x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1.31x | 44.77x | 24.06x | 49.35x | 17.86x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.34x | 2.31x | 3.67x | 7.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 23.82x | 24.88x | 25.17x | 34.44x | 17.62x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.09x | 1.46x | 7.04x | 1.62x | 2.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.01x | 10.47x | 9.87x | 15.39x | 10.32x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 2.57x | 25.00x | 63.73x | 57.05x | 27.54x |
Profitability & Efficiency
COST 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 $6 for FMX. COST carries lower financial leverage with a 0.28x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PEP's 2.43x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs FMX's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.8% | +22.3% | +41.1% | +28.8% | +40.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.4% | +7.9% | +13.1% | +10.7% | +7.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +0.6% | +14.7% | +15.8% | +34.5% | +14.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.6% | +17.5% | +17.3% | +27.9% | +16.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.78x | 0.67x | 1.33x | 0.28x | 2.43x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $149.5B | $56.4B | $35.2B | -$6.0B | $40.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $108.5B | $10.7B | $10.3B | $14.2B | $9.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $258.0B | $67.1B | $45.5B | $8.2B | $49.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.89x | 11.85x | 10.70x | 77.52x | 10.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WMT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in WMT five years ago would be worth $28,660 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,247 for PEP. Over the past 12 months, WMT leads with a +35.1% total return vs COST's +0.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WMT at 37.7% vs PEP's -4.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +24.0% | +16.1% | +14.2% | +18.4% | +9.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +26.9% | +35.1% | +13.1% | +0.6% | +22.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +37.3% | +161.3% | +31.9% | +108.0% | -11.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +71.7% | +186.6% | +59.9% | +174.0% | +22.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +65.0% | +501.4% | +111.2% | +622.8% | +87.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +11.1% | +37.7% | +9.7% | +27.7% | -4.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FMX and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.08 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FMX's 0.40 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FMX currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs PEP's 90.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.40x | 0.11x | -0.08x | 0.10x | 0.02x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $124.24 | $134.69 | $82.00 | $1067.08 | $171.48 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $83.08 | $91.89 | $65.35 | $846.80 | $127.60 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.6% | +96.8% | +95.6% | +94.5% | +90.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.5 | 56.2 | 56.9 | 54.2 | 50.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 410K | 17.1M | 13.3M | 1.6M | 5.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FMX and WMT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FMX as "Buy", WMT as "Buy", KO as "Buy", COST as "Buy", PEP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 12.5% upside for PEP (target: $174) vs 3.1% for FMX (target: $125). For income investors, FMX offers the higher dividend yield at 64.06% vs COST's 0.49%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $125.00 | $137.22 | $85.71 | $1070.13 | $174.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 64 | 48 | 58 | 45 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +64.1% | +0.7% | +2.6% | +0.5% | +3.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 37 | 35 | 0 | 25 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $77.65 | $0.94 | $2.04 | $4.91 | $5.57 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +15.4% | +0.8% | +0.2% | +0.2% | +0.5% |
KO leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). FMX leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
FMX vs WMT vs KO vs COST vs PEP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FMX or WMT or KO or COST or PEP a better buy right now?
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. 3x 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.
02Which has the better valuation — FMX or WMT or KO or COST or PEP?
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. 4x. On forward P/E, Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. is actually cheaper at 1. 3x. 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. 15x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 47x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FMX or WMT or KO or COST or PEP?
Over the past 5 years, Walmart Inc.
(WMT) delivered a total return of +186. 6%, compared to +22. 5% for PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: COST returned +622. 8% versus FMX's +65. 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 — FMX or WMT or KO or COST or PEP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
08β versus Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. 's 0. 40β — meaning FMX is approximately -626% 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 2% for PepsiCo, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FMX or WMT or KO or COST or PEP?
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.
06Which has better profit margins — FMX or WMT or KO or COST or PEP?
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.
07Is FMX or WMT or KO or COST 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, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 15x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 47x. 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. 3x forward P/E versus 49. 4x for Costco Wholesale Corporation — 48. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PEP: 12. 5% to $174. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — FMX or WMT or KO or COST or PEP?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Fomento Económico Mexicano, S. A. B. de C. V. (FMX) offers the highest yield at 64. 1%, versus 0. 5% for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST).
09Is FMX or WMT or KO or COST or PEP better for a retirement portfolio?
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. 11), 0. 7% yield, +501. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WMT: +501. 4%, FMX: +65. 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 FMX and WMT and KO and COST 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: 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; PEP is a large-cap income-oriented stock. FMX, WMT, KO, PEP 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.