Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PRMB vs KO vs PEP vs FIZZ vs CELH
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
PRMB vs KO vs PEP vs FIZZ 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 | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $8.08B | $337.62B | $213.59B | $3.29B | $8.80B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.68B | $49.28B | $93.92B | $1.20B | $2.97B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $59M | $13.70B | $8.24B | $187M | $149M |
| Gross Margin | 29.2% | 61.7% | 54.1% | 37.2% | 49.6% |
| Operating Margin | 7.7% | 29.3% | 12.2% | 19.7% | 10.4% |
| Forward P/E | 17.2x | 24.1x | 18.0x | 17.6x | 21.3x |
| Total Debt | $5.73B | $45.49B | $49.90B | $72M | $670M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $377M | $10.27B | $9.16B | $194M | $399M |
PRMB vs KO vs PEP vs FIZZ vs CELH — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primo Brands Corpor… (PRMB) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 168.0 | +68.0% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 100 | 118.8 | +18.8% |
| National Beverage C… (FIZZ) | 100 | 123.4 | +23.4% |
| Celsius Holdings, I… (CELH) | 100 | 1108.7 | +1008.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PRMB vs KO vs PEP vs FIZZ vs CELH
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PRMB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 29.3%, EPS growth 336.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 57.9%
- Lower P/E (17.2x vs 18.0x)
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is quality.
- 27.8% margin vs PRMB's 0.9%
PEP has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability.
- Dividend streak 25 yrs, beta 0.03, yield 3.6%
- Beta 0.03 vs CELH's 1.29
- +22.8% vs PRMB's -31.0%
FIZZ is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.29, Low D/E 16.2%, current ratio 2.90x
- Beta 0.29, yield 9.2%, current ratio 2.90x
- 9.2% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.6%
- 27.1% ROA vs PRMB's 0.5%, ROIC 57.9% vs 6.7%
CELH is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 41.3% 10Y total return vs PRMB's 117.4%
- PEG 0.46 vs PEP's 5.53
- 85.5% revenue growth vs FIZZ's 0.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 85.5% revenue growth vs FIZZ's 0.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (17.2x vs 18.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs PRMB's 0.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.03 vs CELH's 1.29 | |
| Dividends | 9.2% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +22.8% vs PRMB's -31.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 27.1% ROA vs PRMB's 0.5%, ROIC 57.9% vs 6.7% |
PRMB vs KO vs PEP vs FIZZ vs CELH — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
PRMB vs KO vs PEP vs FIZZ vs CELH — 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
PRMB leads 2 • FIZZ leads 1 • PEP leads 0 • CELH leads 0 • 1 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 — 78.3x FIZZ's $1.2B. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PRMB's 0.9%. On growth, CELH holds the edge at +137.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6.7B | $49.3B | $93.9B | $1.2B | $3.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $997M | $15.5B | $14.3B | $258M | $336M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $59M | $13.7B | $8.2B | $187M | $149M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $338M | $12.6B | $7.7B | $157M | $293M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +29.2% | +61.7% | +54.1% | +37.2% | +49.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +7.7% | +29.3% | +12.2% | +19.7% | +10.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.9% | +27.8% | +8.8% | +15.6% | +5.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.1% | +25.5% | +8.2% | +13.1% | +9.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +0.8% | +12.1% | +5.6% | -1.0% | +137.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -6.9% | +18.2% | +66.7% | 0.0% | +120.0% |
Valuation Metrics
PRMB leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.7x trailing earnings, FIZZ trades at a 87% valuation discount to PRMB's 139.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), KO offers better value at 2.31x vs PEP's 7.98x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.1B | $337.6B | $213.6B | $3.3B | $8.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $13.4B | $372.8B | $254.3B | $3.2B | $9.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 139.00x | 25.80x | 26.05x | 17.67x | 137.04x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 17.20x | 24.11x | 18.05x | 17.56x | 21.32x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.31x | 7.98x | 2.37x | 2.93x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.86x | 25.17x | 17.78x | 12.37x | 18.22x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.21x | 7.04x | 2.27x | 2.74x | 3.50x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.79x | 9.87x | 10.43x | 7.42x | 2.76x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 26.07x | 63.75x | 27.84x | 19.32x | 27.22x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FIZZ 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 $2 for PRMB. FIZZ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.16x 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 | +1.9% | +41.1% | +40.1% | +39.3% | +6.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.5% | +13.1% | +7.7% | +27.1% | +3.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.7% | +15.8% | +14.9% | +57.9% | +19.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.9% | +17.3% | +16.1% | +40.4% | +17.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.91x | 1.33x | 2.43x | 0.16x | 0.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $5.3B | $35.2B | $40.7B | -$122M | $271M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $377M | $10.3B | $9.2B | $194M | $399M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.7B | $45.5B | $49.9B | $72M | $670M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.04x | 10.70x | 10.34x | — | 2.92x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PRMB 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 $20,941 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,683 for FIZZ. Over the past 12 months, PEP leads with a +22.8% total return vs PRMB's -31.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PRMB at 19.3% vs FIZZ's -9.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +38.1% | +14.3% | +10.9% | +11.1% | -28.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -31.0% | +11.2% | +22.8% | -19.4% | -4.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +69.7% | +31.9% | -10.8% | -25.7% | -3.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +46.1% | +61.1% | +24.6% | -13.2% | +109.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +117.4% | +111.2% | +89.2% | +82.6% | +4129.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +19.3% | +9.7% | -3.7% | -9.4% | -1.3% |
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 95.7% from its 52-week high vs CELH's 51.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.67x | -0.09x | 0.03x | 0.29x | 1.29x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $33.70 | $82.00 | $171.48 | $47.89 | $66.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $14.36 | $65.35 | $127.60 | $31.21 | $31.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +66.0% | +95.7% | +91.1% | +73.4% | +51.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.2 | 61.7 | 49.9 | 56.8 | 39.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.5M | 13.4M | 5.7M | 220K | 7.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KO and FIZZ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PRMB as "Buy", KO as "Buy", PEP as "Hold", FIZZ as "Sell", CELH as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 72.2% upside for CELH (target: $59) vs -3.3% for FIZZ (target: $34). For income investors, FIZZ offers the higher dividend yield at 9.23% vs CELH's 0.46%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Sell | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $25.71 | $85.71 | $174.00 | $34.00 | $59.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 48 | 45 | 8 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.8% | +2.6% | +3.6% | +9.2% | +0.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 35 | 25 | 4 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.40 | $2.04 | $5.57 | $3.25 | $0.16 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.2% | +0.2% | +0.5% | 0.0% | +0.5% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Risk & Volatility). PRMB leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 1 tied.
PRMB vs KO vs PEP vs FIZZ vs CELH: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PRMB or KO or PEP or FIZZ 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 0. 8% for National Beverage Corp. (FIZZ). National Beverage Corp. (FIZZ) offers the better valuation at 17. 7x trailing P/E (17. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Primo Brands Corporation (PRMB) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — PRMB or KO or PEP or FIZZ or CELH?
On trailing P/E, National Beverage Corp.
(FIZZ) is the cheapest at 17. 7x versus Primo Brands Corporation at 139. 0x. On forward P/E, Primo Brands Corporation is actually cheaper at 17. 2x — 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: Celsius Holdings, Inc. wins at 0. 46x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 53x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PRMB or KO or PEP or FIZZ or CELH?
Over the past 5 years, Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) delivered a total return of +109. 4%, compared to -13. 2% for National Beverage Corp. (FIZZ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CELH returned +41. 3% versus FIZZ's +82. 6%. 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 — PRMB or KO or PEP or FIZZ 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, National Beverage Corp. (FIZZ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 16% versus 2% for PepsiCo, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PRMB or KO or PEP or FIZZ or CELH?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) is pulling ahead at 85. 5% versus 0. 8% for National Beverage Corp. (FIZZ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Primo Brands Corporation grew EPS 336. 3% year-over-year, compared to -44. 4% for Celsius Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PRMB leads at 57. 9% 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 — PRMB or KO or PEP or FIZZ or CELH?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 0. 9% for Primo Brands Corporation — 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 11. 3% for PRMB. 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 PRMB or KO or PEP or FIZZ 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. 46x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 53x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Primo Brands Corporation (PRMB) trades at 17. 2x forward P/E versus 24. 1x for The Coca-Cola Company — 6. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CELH: 72. 2% to $59. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — PRMB or KO or PEP or FIZZ or CELH?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
National Beverage Corp. (FIZZ) offers the highest yield at 9. 2%, versus 0. 5% for Celsius Holdings, Inc. (CELH).
09Is PRMB or KO or PEP or FIZZ 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, +111. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +111. 2%, CELH: +41. 3%), 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 PRMB and KO and PEP and FIZZ 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: PRMB is a small-cap high-growth stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; PEP is a large-cap income-oriented stock; FIZZ is a small-cap deep-value stock; CELH is a small-cap high-growth stock. PRMB, KO, PEP, FIZZ pay a dividend while CELH 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.