Asset Management
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
LEO vs MSCI vs KO vs ICE vs PEP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
LEO vs MSCI vs KO vs ICE vs PEP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $397M | $43.62B | $355.61B | $79.60B | $197.17B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $54M | $3.24B | $49.28B | $12.64B | $93.92B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $60M | $1.32B | $13.70B | $3.30B | $8.24B |
| Gross Margin | 67.7% | 82.9% | 61.7% | 61.9% | 54.1% |
| Operating Margin | 114.4% | 55.4% | 29.3% | 38.7% | 12.2% |
| Forward P/E | 15.9x | 30.5x | 25.3x | 17.3x | 16.7x |
| Total Debt | $139M | $6.31B | $45.49B | $20.28B | $49.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $107K | $515M | $10.27B | $837M | $9.16B |
LEO vs MSCI vs KO vs ICE vs PEP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BNY Mellon Strategi… (LEO) | 100 | 82.2 | -17.8% |
| MSCI Inc. (MSCI) | 100 | 179.5 | +79.5% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 153.4 | +53.4% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 100 | 109.1 | +9.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LEO vs MSCI vs KO vs ICE vs PEP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LEO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.25, yield 3.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.25, Low D/E 32.8%, current ratio 1.88x
- Beta 0.25, yield 3.8%, current ratio 1.88x
- Lower P/E (15.9x vs 16.7x)
MSCI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- 7.4% 10Y total return vs ICE's 195.3%
- PEG 1.80 vs PEP's 5.11
- 9.7% NII/revenue growth vs LEO's -107.1%
- 24.0% ROA vs ICE's 2.3%, ROIC 34.9% vs 7.5%
KO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 1.9%, EPS growth 23.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.7%
- +17.2% vs ICE's -20.4%
Among these 5 stocks, ICE doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
PEP is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 3.9% yield, 54-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.7% NII/revenue growth vs LEO's -107.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.9x vs 16.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 111.0% margin vs PEP's 8.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.25 vs MSCI's 0.51 | |
| Dividends | 3.9% yield, 54-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +17.2% vs ICE's -20.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 24.0% ROA vs ICE's 2.3%, ROIC 34.9% vs 7.5% |
LEO vs MSCI vs KO vs ICE vs PEP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
LEO vs MSCI vs KO vs ICE 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 2 of 6 categories
LEO leads 1 • MSCI leads 0 • ICE leads 0 • PEP leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — LEO and MSCI each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PEP is the larger business by revenue, generating $93.9B annually — 1725.6x LEO's $54M. LEO is the more profitable business, keeping 111.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PEP's 8.8%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $54M | $3.2B | $49.3B | $12.6B | $93.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $37M | $2.0B | $15.5B | $6.5B | $14.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $60M | $1.3B | $13.7B | $3.3B | $8.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $25M | $1.5B | $12.6B | $4.3B | $7.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.7% | +82.9% | +61.7% | +61.9% | +54.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +114.4% | +55.4% | +29.3% | +38.7% | +12.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +111.0% | +40.7% | +27.8% | +26.1% | +8.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +46.7% | +47.4% | +25.5% | +33.9% | +8.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +12.1% | — | +5.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -140.7% | +49.1% | +18.2% | +23.1% | +66.7% |
Valuation Metrics
LEO leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 24.0x trailing earnings, PEP trades at a 38% valuation discount to MSCI's 38.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MSCI offers better value at 2.27x vs PEP's 7.37x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $397M | $43.6B | $355.6B | $79.6B | $197.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $536M | $49.4B | $390.8B | $99.0B | $237.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -30.38x | 38.50x | 27.18x | 24.36x | 24.05x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.95x | 30.47x | 25.27x | 17.34x | 16.68x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.27x | 2.43x | 2.74x | 7.37x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 25.57x | 26.39x | 15.34x | 16.63x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 13.91x | 7.42x | 6.30x | 2.10x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.94x | — | 10.40x | 2.77x | 9.63x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 31.41x | 28.16x | 67.15x | 18.56x | 25.70x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — LEO and MSCI each lead in 3 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 $12 for ICE. LEO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.33x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PEP's 2.43x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs PEP's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.9% | — | +41.1% | +11.6% | +40.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +9.2% | +24.0% | +13.1% | +2.3% | +7.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -1.7% | +34.9% | +15.8% | +7.5% | +14.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.2% | +44.3% | +17.3% | +9.5% | +16.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 8 | 7 | 9 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.33x | — | 1.33x | 0.70x | 2.43x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $139M | $5.8B | $35.2B | $19.4B | $40.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $106,568 | $515M | $10.3B | $837M | $9.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $139M | $6.3B | $45.5B | $20.3B | $49.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.53x | 7.67x | 10.70x | 6.53x | 10.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KO five years ago would be worth $16,560 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,810 for LEO. Over the past 12 months, KO leads with a +17.2% total return vs ICE's -20.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KO at 13.7% vs PEP's -4.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.5% | +6.7% | +20.3% | -11.8% | +3.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +15.1% | +9.3% | +17.2% | -20.4% | +13.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +17.4% | +30.7% | +47.0% | +34.6% | -11.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -11.9% | +28.2% | +65.6% | +30.9% | +14.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.0% | +744.0% | +121.1% | +195.3% | +82.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +5.5% | +9.3% | +13.7% | +10.4% | -4.1% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 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 MSCI's 0.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 74.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.25x | 0.51x | -0.20x | 0.35x | -0.11x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.54 | $644.64 | $84.04 | $189.35 | $171.48 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.71 | $501.08 | $65.35 | $136.67 | $127.60 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.5% | +92.9% | +98.3% | +74.2% | +84.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.4 | 47.6 | 60.6 | 31.9 | 41.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 209K | 535K | 12.7M | 3.2M | 6.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KO and PEP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MSCI as "Buy", KO as "Buy", ICE as "Buy", PEP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 38.0% upside for ICE (target: $194) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, PEP offers the higher dividend yield at 3.86% vs MSCI's 1.20%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $688.00 | $86.13 | $194.00 | $167.88 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 27 | 48 | 36 | 45 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.8% | +1.2% | +2.5% | +1.4% | +3.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 12 | 56 | 13 | 54 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.24 | $7.20 | $2.04 | $1.93 | $5.57 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +5.7% | +0.2% | +1.7% | +0.5% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). LEO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
LEO vs MSCI vs KO vs ICE vs PEP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LEO or MSCI or KO or ICE or PEP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MSCI Inc.
(MSCI) is the stronger pick with 9. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -107. 1% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO). PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) offers the better valuation at 24. 0x trailing P/E (16. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MSCI Inc. (MSCI) a "Buy" — based on 27 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 — LEO or MSCI or KO or ICE or PEP?
On trailing P/E, PepsiCo, Inc.
(PEP) is the cheapest at 24. 0x versus MSCI Inc. at 38. 5x. On forward P/E, BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: MSCI Inc. wins at 1. 80x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 11x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LEO or MSCI or KO or ICE or PEP?
Over the past 5 years, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) delivered a total return of +65.
6%, compared to -11. 9% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSCI returned +744. 0% versus LEO's +8. 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 — LEO or MSCI or KO or ICE or PEP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus MSCI Inc. 's 0. 51β — meaning MSCI is approximately -354% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 33% versus 2% for PepsiCo, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LEO or MSCI or KO or ICE or PEP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MSCI Inc.
(MSCI) is pulling ahead at 9. 7% versus -107. 1% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to -117. 8% for BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, 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 — LEO or MSCI or KO or ICE or PEP?
BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc.
(LEO) is the more profitable company, earning 252. 7% net margin versus 8. 8% for PepsiCo, Inc. — meaning it keeps 252. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LEO leads at 252. 7% versus 12. 2% for PEP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LEO leads at 254. 2%, 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 LEO or MSCI or KO or ICE 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, MSCI Inc. (MSCI) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 80x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 11x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, BNY Mellon Strategic Municipals, Inc. (LEO) trades at 15. 9x forward P/E versus 30. 5x for MSCI Inc. — 14. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 38. 0% to $194. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — LEO or MSCI or KO or ICE or PEP?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) offers the highest yield at 3. 9%, versus 1. 2% for MSCI Inc. (MSCI).
09Is LEO or MSCI or KO or ICE or PEP 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). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, LEO: +8. 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 LEO and MSCI and KO and ICE and PEP?
These companies operate in different sectors (LEO (Financial Services) and MSCI (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and ICE (Financial Services) and PEP (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LEO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MSCI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PEP is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. 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.