PGC vs ICE vs KO

For growth investors, Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) is the stronger pick with 9.

5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) offers the better valuation at 21. 9x trailing P/E (12. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) a "Buy" — based on 7 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, Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) is the cheapest at 21.

9x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation is actually cheaper at 12. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation wins at 1. 38x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) delivered a total return of +65.

6%, compared to +30. 9% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ICE returned +195. 3% versus KO's +121. 1%. 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.

20β versus Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation's 0. 89β — meaning PGC is approximately -542% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 40% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) is pulling ahead at 9.

5% versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to 14. 1% for Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation. 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 8. 5% for Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus 11. 9% for PGC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ICE leads at 61. 9%, 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, Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 38x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC) trades at 12. 5x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 12. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 38. 0% to $194. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

The Coca-Cola Company (KO) offers the highest yield at 2. 5%, versus 0. 4% for Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation (PGC).

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%, PGC: +155. 7%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (PGC (Financial Services) and ICE (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

ICE, KO pay a dividend while PGC 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.