Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
MNST vs KO vs PEP vs CELH
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
MNST vs KO vs PEP vs CELH — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $75.51B | $340.74B | $213.14B | $8.43B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $8.29B | $49.28B | $93.92B | $2.52B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.91B | $13.70B | $8.24B | $108M |
| Gross Margin | 55.8% | 61.7% | 54.1% | 50.4% |
| Operating Margin | 29.2% | 29.3% | 12.2% | 8.8% |
| Forward P/E | 34.3x | 24.3x | 18.0x | 20.4x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $45.49B | $49.90B | $670M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2.09B | $10.27B | $9.16B | $399M |
MNST vs KO vs PEP vs CELH — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) | 100 | 214.7 | +114.7% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 169.6 | +69.6% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 100 | 118.6 | +18.6% |
| Celsius Holdings, I… (CELH) | 100 | 1061.5 | +961.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MNST vs KO vs PEP vs CELH
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MNST has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 10.7%, EPS growth 30.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 9.5%
- +28.6% vs CELH's -7.7%
- 19.1% ROA vs CELH's 2.7%, ROIC 33.1% vs 19.7%
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is quality.
- 27.8% margin vs CELH's 4.3%
PEP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 25 yrs, beta 0.03, yield 3.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.03, current ratio 0.85x
- Beta 0.03, yield 3.6%, current ratio 0.85x
- Beta 0.03 vs CELH's 1.29
CELH is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 39.0% 10Y total return vs MNST's 212.7%
- PEG 0.44 vs PEP's 5.52
- 85.5% revenue growth vs KO's 1.9%
- Lower P/E (20.4x vs 24.3x), PEG 0.44 vs 2.18
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 85.5% revenue growth vs KO's 1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.4x vs 24.3x), PEG 0.44 vs 2.18 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs CELH's 4.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.03 vs CELH's 1.29 | |
| Dividends | 3.6% yield, 25-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +28.6% vs CELH's -7.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.1% ROA vs CELH's 2.7%, ROIC 33.1% vs 19.7% |
MNST vs KO vs PEP vs CELH — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
MNST vs KO vs PEP vs CELH — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories
MNST leads 1 • PEP leads 0 • CELH leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PEP is the larger business by revenue, generating $93.9B annually — 37.3x CELH's $2.5B. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CELH's 4.3%. On growth, CELH holds the edge at +117.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $8.3B | $49.3B | $93.9B | $2.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.5B | $15.5B | $14.3B | $251M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.9B | $13.7B | $8.2B | $108M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | $12.6B | $7.7B | $323M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +55.8% | +61.7% | +54.1% | +50.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +29.2% | +29.3% | +12.2% | +8.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +23.0% | +27.8% | +8.8% | +4.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +25.5% | +8.2% | +12.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +17.6% | +12.1% | +5.6% | +117.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +64.3% | +18.2% | +66.7% | +130.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — PEP and CELH each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 26.0x trailing earnings, PEP trades at a 80% valuation discount to CELH's 131.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), KO offers better value at 2.33x vs PEP's 7.97x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $75.5B | $340.7B | $213.1B | $8.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $73.4B | $376.0B | $253.9B | $8.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 39.79x | 26.04x | 25.99x | 131.20x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 34.26x | 24.33x | 18.01x | 20.41x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 4.97x | 2.33x | 7.97x | 2.80x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 30.35x | 25.38x | 17.75x | 17.47x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 9.10x | 7.11x | 2.27x | 3.35x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 9.15x | 9.96x | 10.41x | 2.64x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 64.34x | 27.78x | 26.06x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MNST leads this category, winning 6 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 $5 for CELH. CELH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.23x 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 CELH's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +23.1% | +41.1% | +40.1% | +4.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +19.1% | +13.1% | +7.7% | +2.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +33.1% | +15.8% | +14.9% | +19.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +31.9% | +17.3% | +16.1% | +17.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 1.33x | 2.43x | 0.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2.1B | $35.2B | $40.7B | $271M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.1B | $10.3B | $9.2B | $399M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $45.5B | $49.9B | $670M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 299.84x | 10.70x | 10.34x | 3.28x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CELH five years ago would be worth $19,771 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,437 for PEP. Over the past 12 months, MNST leads with a +28.6% total return vs CELH's -7.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KO at 10.0% vs PEP's -3.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1.4% | +15.3% | +10.7% | -31.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +28.6% | +13.3% | +23.6% | -7.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +30.8% | +33.1% | -11.0% | -7.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +62.5% | +62.3% | +24.4% | +97.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +212.7% | +112.5% | +89.5% | +3900.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +9.4% | +10.0% | -3.8% | -2.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.09 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CELH's 1.29 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 96.5% from its 52-week high vs CELH's 49.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.26x | -0.09x | 0.03x | 1.29x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $87.38 | $82.00 | $171.48 | $66.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $58.09 | $65.35 | $127.60 | $31.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +88.3% | +96.5% | +90.9% | +49.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.6 | 58.6 | 47.6 | 41.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.2M | 13.4M | 5.7M | 6.9M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KO and PEP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MNST as "Buy", KO as "Buy", PEP as "Hold", CELH as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 79.9% upside for CELH (target: $59) vs 8.3% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, PEP offers the higher dividend yield at 3.57% vs CELH's 0.48%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $85.38 | $85.71 | $174.00 | $59.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 43 | 48 | 45 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.6% | +3.6% | +0.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 35 | 25 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.04 | $5.57 | $0.16 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.5% | +0.5% |
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). MNST leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
MNST vs KO vs PEP vs CELH: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MNST or KO or PEP or CELH 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 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) offers the better valuation at 26. 0x trailing P/E (18. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) a "Buy" — based on 43 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 — MNST or KO or PEP or CELH?
On trailing P/E, PepsiCo, Inc.
(PEP) is the cheapest at 26. 0x versus Celsius Holdings, Inc. at 131. 2x. On forward P/E, PepsiCo, Inc. is actually cheaper at 18. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Celsius Holdings, Inc. wins at 0. 44x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 52x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MNST or KO or PEP or CELH?
Over the past 5 years, Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) delivered a total return of +97. 7%, compared to +24. 4% for PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CELH returned +39. 0% versus PEP's +89. 5%. 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 — MNST or KO or PEP or CELH?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
09β versus Celsius Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 29β — meaning CELH is approximately -1567% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Celsius Holdings, Inc. (CELH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 2% for PepsiCo, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MNST or KO or PEP or CELH?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) is pulling ahead at 85. 5% versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Monster Beverage Corporation grew EPS 30. 2% 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 — MNST or KO or PEP or CELH?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 4. 3% for Celsius Holdings, 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 12. 2% for PEP. 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 MNST or KO or PEP or CELH 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. 44x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 52x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) trades at 18. 0x forward P/E versus 34. 3x for Monster Beverage Corporation — 16. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CELH: 79. 9% to $59. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — MNST or KO or PEP or CELH?
In this comparison, PEP (3.
6% yield), KO (2. 6% yield), CELH (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. MNST does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MNST or KO or PEP or CELH 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.
09), 2. 6% yield, +112. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +112. 5%, CELH: +39. 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 MNST and KO and PEP and CELH?
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: MNST is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; PEP is a large-cap income-oriented stock; CELH is a small-cap high-growth stock. KO, PEP pay a dividend while MNST, CELH 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.
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.