Shell Companies
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
POLE vs BWA vs KO vs MGA vs PEP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Parts
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Auto - Parts
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
POLE vs BWA vs KO vs MGA vs PEP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Auto - Parts | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Auto - Parts | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $255M | $15.35B | $355.61B | $18.60B | $197.17B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $14.33B | $49.28B | $42.18B | $93.92B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $8M | $362M | $13.70B | $829M | $8.24B |
| Gross Margin | — | 18.9% | 61.7% | 13.2% | 54.1% |
| Operating Margin | — | 9.7% | 29.3% | 6.0% | 12.2% |
| Forward P/E | 38.4x | 14.3x | 25.3x | 10.0x | 16.7x |
| Total Debt | $450K | $4.18B | $45.49B | $8.32B | $49.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $48K | $2.31B | $10.27B | $1.61B | $9.16B |
POLE vs BWA vs KO vs MGA vs PEP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 24 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Andretti Acquisitio… (POLE) | 100 | 107.9 | +7.9% |
| BorgWarner Inc. (BWA) | 100 | 221.6 | +121.6% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 126.5 | +26.5% |
| Magna International… (MGA) | 100 | 169.1 | +69.1% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 100 | 86.9 | -13.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: POLE vs BWA vs KO vs MGA vs PEP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, POLE doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
BWA has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 178.1% 10Y total return vs KO's 121.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.22, Low D/E 74.4%, current ratio 2.07x
- Beta 1.22, yield 0.7%, current ratio 2.07x
- Beta 1.22 vs MGA's 1.23
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 2.26 vs PEP's 5.11
- 27.8% margin vs MGA's 2.0%
- 13.1% ROA vs MGA's 2.6%, ROIC 15.8% vs 8.6%
MGA is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (10.0x vs 16.7x), PEG 2.89 vs 5.11
PEP ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 54 yrs, beta -0.11, yield 3.9%
- Rev growth 2.3%, EPS growth -13.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 2.8%
- 2.3% revenue growth vs MGA's -0.2%
- 3.9% yield, 54-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 2.3% revenue growth vs MGA's -0.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.0x vs 16.7x), PEG 2.89 vs 5.11 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs MGA's 2.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.22 vs MGA's 1.23 | |
| Dividends | 3.9% yield, 54-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +125.3% vs POLE's +3.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs MGA's 2.6%, ROIC 15.8% vs 8.6% |
POLE vs BWA vs KO vs MGA 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.
POLE vs BWA vs KO vs MGA 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
MGA leads 1 • BWA leads 1 • POLE leads 0 • 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)
PEP and POLE operate at a comparable scale, with $93.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MGA's 2.0%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $14.3B | $49.3B | $42.2B | $93.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$1M | $2.1B | $15.5B | $4.3B | $14.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $8M | $362M | $13.7B | $829M | $8.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$1M | $1.4B | $12.6B | $2.2B | $7.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +18.9% | +61.7% | +13.2% | +54.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +9.7% | +29.3% | +6.0% | +12.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +2.5% | +27.8% | +2.0% | +8.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +10.1% | +25.5% | +5.1% | +8.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +0.5% | +12.1% | +3.6% | +5.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +60.0% | +61.1% | +18.2% | -100.5% | +66.7% |
Valuation Metrics
MGA leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 22.3x trailing earnings, MGA trades at a 62% valuation discount to BWA's 58.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), KO offers better value at 2.43x vs PEP's 7.37x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $255M | $15.4B | $355.6B | $18.6B | $197.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $256M | $17.2B | $390.8B | $25.3B | $237.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 38.36x | 58.21x | 27.18x | 22.32x | 24.05x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 14.34x | 25.27x | 10.05x | 16.68x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.43x | 6.41x | 7.37x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 8.43x | 26.39x | 6.60x | 16.63x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 1.07x | 7.42x | 0.44x | 2.10x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.06x | 2.87x | 10.40x | 1.47x | 9.63x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 13.02x | 67.15x | 10.24x | 25.70x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 4 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 $4 for POLE. POLE carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PEP's 2.43x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BWA scores 8/9 vs POLE's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +3.6% | +6.2% | +41.1% | +6.5% | +40.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.5% | +2.6% | +13.1% | +2.6% | +7.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.5% | +12.9% | +15.8% | +8.6% | +14.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.6% | +12.7% | +17.3% | +10.9% | +16.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.74x | 1.33x | 0.65x | 2.43x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $401,531 | $1.9B | $35.2B | $6.7B | $40.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $48,469 | $2.3B | $10.3B | $1.6B | $9.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $450,000 | $4.2B | $45.5B | $8.3B | $49.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 14.17x | 10.70x | 10.07x | 10.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BWA leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BWA five years ago would be worth $16,904 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,880 for MGA. Over the past 12 months, BWA leads with a +125.3% total return vs POLE's +3.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BWA at 23.6% vs PEP's -4.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.2% | +60.5% | +20.3% | +23.9% | +3.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +3.5% | +125.3% | +17.2% | +78.5% | +13.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +7.9% | +88.9% | +47.0% | +34.0% | -11.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +7.9% | +69.0% | +65.6% | -21.2% | +14.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +7.9% | +178.1% | +121.1% | +110.7% | +82.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.6% | +23.6% | +13.7% | +10.3% | -4.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — POLE and KO each lead in 1 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 MGA's 1.23 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. POLE currently trades 98.5% from its 52-week high vs PEP's 84.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.00x | 1.22x | -0.20x | 1.23x | -0.11x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.90 | $78.82 | $84.04 | $69.94 | $171.48 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.36 | $32.24 | $65.35 | $36.74 | $127.60 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.5% | +94.5% | +98.3% | +95.4% | +84.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 65.0 | 62.6 | 60.6 | 55.1 | 41.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 15K | 2.7M | 12.7M | 1.3M | 6.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KO and PEP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BWA as "Buy", KO as "Buy", MGA as "Buy", PEP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 16.4% upside for PEP (target: $168) vs 0.9% for MGA (target: $67). For income investors, PEP offers the higher dividend yield at 3.86% vs BWA's 0.74%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $77.09 | $86.13 | $67.30 | $167.88 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 38 | 48 | 30 | 45 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.7% | +2.5% | +2.9% | +3.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 56 | 16 | 54 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.55 | $2.04 | $1.96 | $5.57 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +3.3% | +0.2% | +0.8% | +0.5% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MGA leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
POLE vs BWA vs KO vs MGA vs PEP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is POLE or BWA or KO or MGA or PEP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, PepsiCo, Inc.
(PEP) is the stronger pick with 2. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 2% for Magna International Inc. (MGA). Magna International Inc. (MGA) offers the better valuation at 22. 3x trailing P/E (10. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate BorgWarner Inc. (BWA) a "Buy" — based on 38 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 — POLE or BWA or KO or MGA or PEP?
On trailing P/E, Magna International Inc.
(MGA) is the cheapest at 22. 3x versus BorgWarner Inc. at 58. 2x. On forward P/E, Magna International Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 0x. 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. 26x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 11x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — POLE or BWA or KO or MGA or PEP?
Over the past 5 years, BorgWarner Inc.
(BWA) delivered a total return of +69. 0%, compared to -21. 2% for Magna International Inc. (MGA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BWA returned +178. 1% versus POLE's +7. 9%. 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 — POLE or BWA or KO or MGA or PEP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Magna International Inc. 's 1. 23β — meaning MGA is approximately -714% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Andretti Acquisition Corp. II (POLE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 2% for PepsiCo, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — POLE or BWA or KO or MGA or PEP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), PepsiCo, Inc.
(PEP) is pulling ahead at 2. 3% versus -0. 2% for Magna International Inc. (MGA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Andretti Acquisition Corp. II grew EPS 55. 6% year-over-year, compared to -15. 1% for Magna International Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BWA leads at 4. 3% 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 — POLE or BWA or KO or MGA or PEP?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 0. 0% for Andretti Acquisition Corp. II — 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 0. 0% for POLE. 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 POLE or BWA or KO or MGA 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. 26x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 11x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Magna International Inc. (MGA) trades at 10. 0x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 15. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PEP: 16. 4% to $167. 88.
08Which pays a better dividend — POLE or BWA or KO or MGA or PEP?
In this comparison, PEP (3.
9% yield), MGA (2. 9% yield), KO (2. 5% yield), BWA (0. 7% yield) pay a dividend. POLE does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is POLE or BWA or KO or MGA 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%, MGA: +110. 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.
10What are the main differences between POLE and BWA and KO and MGA and PEP?
These companies operate in different sectors (POLE (Financial Services) and BWA (Consumer Cyclical) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and MGA (Consumer Cyclical) 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: POLE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BWA is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MGA is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PEP is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. BWA, KO, MGA, PEP pay a dividend while POLE 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.