Beverages - Alcoholic
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
SBEV vs FIZZ vs CELH vs MNST
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
SBEV vs FIZZ vs CELH vs MNST — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Beverages - Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $387K | $3.29B | $8.80B | $74.29B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $1.20B | $2.97B | $8.29B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-31M | $187M | $149M | $1.91B |
| Gross Margin | -168.7% | 37.2% | 49.6% | 55.8% |
| Operating Margin | -19.2% | 19.7% | 10.4% | 29.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 17.6x | 21.3x | 33.7x |
| Total Debt | $13M | $72M | $670M | $0.00 |
| Cash & Equiv. | $15K | $194M | $399M | $2.09B |
SBEV vs FIZZ vs CELH vs MNST — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Splash Beverage Gro… (SBEV) | 100 | 0.3 | -99.7% |
| National Beverage C… (FIZZ) | 100 | 123.4 | +23.4% |
| Celsius Holdings, I… (CELH) | 100 | 1108.7 | +1008.7% |
| Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) | 100 | 211.3 | +111.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SBEV vs FIZZ vs CELH vs MNST
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SBEV lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
FIZZ carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 0.29, yield 9.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.29, Low D/E 16.2%, current ratio 2.90x
- Beta 0.29, yield 9.2%, current ratio 2.90x
- Lower P/E (17.6x vs 33.7x), PEG 2.36 vs 4.21
CELH is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 85.5%, EPS growth -44.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 56.7%
- 41.3% 10Y total return vs MNST's 206.3%
- PEG 0.46 vs MNST's 4.21
- 85.5% revenue growth vs SBEV's -78.0%
MNST is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and stability is your priority.
- 23.0% margin vs SBEV's -30.3%
- Beta 0.26 vs SBEV's 2.87
- +25.4% vs SBEV's -96.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 85.5% revenue growth vs SBEV's -78.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (17.6x vs 33.7x), PEG 2.36 vs 4.21 | |
| Quality / Margins | 23.0% margin vs SBEV's -30.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.26 vs SBEV's 2.87 | |
| Dividends | 9.2% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs CELH's 0.5%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +25.4% vs SBEV's -96.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 27.1% ROA vs SBEV's -138.2% |
SBEV vs FIZZ vs CELH vs MNST — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
SBEV vs FIZZ vs CELH vs MNST — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MNST leads in 3 of 6 categories
FIZZ leads 3 • SBEV leads 0 • CELH leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MNST leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MNST is the larger business by revenue, generating $8.3B annually — 8098.7x SBEV's $1M. MNST is the more profitable business, keeping 23.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SBEV's -30.3%. On growth, CELH holds the edge at +137.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $1.2B | $3.0B | $8.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$19M | $258M | $336M | $2.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$31M | $187M | $149M | $1.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2M | $157M | $293M | $2.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -168.7% | +37.2% | +49.6% | +55.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -19.2% | +19.7% | +10.4% | +29.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -30.3% | +15.6% | +5.0% | +23.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -173.5% | +13.1% | +9.9% | +23.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | -1.0% | +137.7% | +17.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.0% | 0.0% | +120.0% | +64.3% |
Valuation Metrics
FIZZ leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.7x trailing earnings, FIZZ trades at a 87% valuation discount to CELH's 137.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FIZZ offers better value at 2.37x vs MNST's 4.89x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $387,068 | $3.3B | $8.8B | $74.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $13M | $3.2B | $9.1B | $72.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.01x | 17.67x | 137.04x | 39.16x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 17.56x | 21.32x | 33.72x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.37x | 2.93x | 4.89x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 12.37x | 18.22x | 28.50x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.09x | 2.74x | 3.50x | 8.96x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 7.42x | 2.76x | 9.06x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 19.32x | 27.22x | 37.79x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FIZZ leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FIZZ delivers a 39.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $39 in annual profit, vs $-5 for SBEV. FIZZ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.16x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CELH's 0.23x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MNST scores 7/9 vs SBEV's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -4.6% | +39.3% | +6.4% | +25.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -138.2% | +27.1% | +3.1% | +20.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +57.9% | +19.7% | +33.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | +40.4% | +17.2% | +31.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.16x | 0.23x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $13M | -$122M | $271M | -$2.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $15,346 | $194M | $399M | $2.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $13M | $72M | $670M | $0 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.14x | — | 2.92x | 372.36x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MNST 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 $11 for SBEV. Over the past 12 months, MNST leads with a +25.4% total return vs SBEV's -96.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MNST at 8.8% vs SBEV's -83.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -68.7% | +11.1% | -28.3% | -0.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -96.5% | -19.4% | -4.3% | +25.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | -25.7% | -3.8% | +28.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | -13.2% | +109.4% | +66.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.6% | +82.6% | +4129.6% | +206.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -83.4% | -9.4% | -1.3% | +8.8% |
Risk & Volatility
MNST leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MNST is the less volatile stock with a 0.26 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SBEV's 2.87 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MNST currently trades 86.9% from its 52-week high vs SBEV's 3.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.87x | 0.29x | 1.29x | 0.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.79 | $47.89 | $66.74 | $87.38 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.22 | $31.21 | $31.80 | $58.09 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +3.4% | +73.4% | +51.3% | +86.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.6 | 56.8 | 39.1 | 54.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.5M | 220K | 7.3M | 5.2M |
Analyst Outlook
FIZZ leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FIZZ as "Sell", CELH as "Buy", MNST 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 | — | Sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $34.00 | $59.00 | $85.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 8 | 22 | 43 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +9.2% | +0.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 4 | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.25 | $0.16 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.5% | +0.1% |
MNST leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). FIZZ leads in 3 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency).
SBEV vs FIZZ vs CELH vs MNST: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SBEV or FIZZ or CELH or MNST 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 -78. 0% for Splash Beverage Group, Inc. (SBEV). 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 Celsius Holdings, Inc. (CELH) a "Buy" — based on 22 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 — SBEV or FIZZ or CELH or MNST?
On trailing P/E, National Beverage Corp.
(FIZZ) is the cheapest at 17. 7x versus Celsius Holdings, Inc. at 137. 0x. On forward P/E, National Beverage Corp. is actually cheaper at 17. 6x. 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 Monster Beverage Corporation's 4. 21x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SBEV or FIZZ or CELH or MNST?
Over the past 5 years, Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) delivered a total return of +109. 4%, compared to -99. 9% for Splash Beverage Group, Inc. (SBEV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CELH returned +41. 3% versus SBEV's -99. 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 — SBEV or FIZZ or CELH or MNST?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
26β versus Splash Beverage Group, Inc. 's 2. 87β — meaning SBEV is approximately 1012% more volatile than MNST relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, National Beverage Corp. (FIZZ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 16% versus 23% for Celsius Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SBEV or FIZZ or CELH or MNST?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) is pulling ahead at 85. 5% versus -78. 0% for Splash Beverage Group, Inc. (SBEV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Monster Beverage Corporation grew EPS 30. 2% year-over-year, compared to -35. 1% for Splash Beverage Group, 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 — SBEV or FIZZ or CELH or MNST?
Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) is the more profitable company, earning 23.
0% net margin versus -571. 7% for Splash Beverage Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 23. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MNST leads at 29. 2% versus -386. 2% for SBEV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MNST leads at 55. 8%, 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 SBEV or FIZZ or CELH or MNST 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 Monster Beverage Corporation's 4. 21x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, National Beverage Corp. (FIZZ) trades at 17. 6x forward P/E versus 33. 7x for Monster Beverage Corporation — 16. 2x 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 — SBEV or FIZZ or CELH or MNST?
In this comparison, FIZZ (9.
2% yield), CELH (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. SBEV, MNST do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SBEV or FIZZ or CELH or MNST better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, National Beverage Corp.
(FIZZ) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 29), 9. 2% yield). Splash Beverage Group, Inc. (SBEV) carries a higher beta of 2. 87 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FIZZ: +82. 6%, SBEV: -99. 6%), 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 SBEV and FIZZ and CELH and MNST?
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: SBEV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FIZZ is a small-cap deep-value stock; CELH is a small-cap high-growth stock; MNST is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. FIZZ pays a dividend while SBEV, CELH, MNST 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.