Discount Stores
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
WMT vs COST vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Discount Stores
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
WMT vs COST vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Discount Stores | Discount Stores | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $964.49B | $435.65B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $725.30B | $293.59B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $23.06B | $8.84B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 25.0% | 12.9% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 4.2% | 3.8% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 41.7x | 47.9x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $67.09B | $8.17B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10.73B | $14.16B | $10.27B |
WMT vs COST vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Walmart Inc. (WMT) | 100 | 303.0 | +203.0% |
| Costco Wholesale Co… (COST) | 100 | 324.0 | +224.0% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: WMT vs COST vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
WMT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +28.6% vs COST's -1.5%
COST is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 8.2%, EPS growth 10.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 6.6%
- 5.8% 10Y total return vs WMT's 447.2%
- Lower volatility, beta -0.04, Low D/E 28.0%, current ratio 1.03x
KO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 56 yrs, beta -0.20, yield 2.5%
- PEG 2.26 vs WMT's 3.79
- Beta -0.20, yield 2.5%, current ratio 1.46x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.2% revenue growth vs KO's 1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (25.3x vs 41.7x), PEG 2.26 vs 3.79 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs COST's 3.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Lower D/E ratio (28.0% vs 132.7%) | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs COST's 0.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +28.6% vs COST's -1.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs WMT's 8.1%, ROIC 15.8% vs 14.4% |
WMT vs COST vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
WMT vs COST vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WMT is the larger business by revenue, generating $725.3B annually — 14.7x KO's $49.3B. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to COST's 3.0%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $725.3B | $293.6B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $41.4B | $13.8B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $23.1B | $8.8B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $12.6B | $8.8B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +25.0% | +12.9% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.2% | +3.8% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.2% | +3.0% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +1.7% | +3.0% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.3% | +11.6% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +19.6% | +15.2% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — WMT and KO each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 27.2x trailing earnings, KO trades at a 50% valuation discount to COST's 53.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), KO offers better value at 2.43x vs WMT's 4.03x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $964.5B | $435.7B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.02T | $429.7B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 44.32x | 53.95x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 41.66x | 47.89x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 4.03x | 3.58x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 23.19x | 33.54x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.35x | 1.58x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 9.14x | 14.98x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 64.63x | 55.59x | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
COST leads this category, winning 7 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 $23 for WMT. COST carries lower financial leverage with a 0.28x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), COST scores 7/9 vs WMT's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +22.7% | +28.3% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.1% | +10.7% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +14.4% | +34.5% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +17.5% | +27.9% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.63x | 0.28x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $56.4B | -$6.0B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10.7B | $14.2B | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $67.1B | $8.2B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 11.70x | 81.54x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
WMT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in WMT five years ago would be worth $26,710 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $16,560 for KO. Over the past 12 months, WMT leads with a +28.6% total return vs COST's -1.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WMT at 34.0% vs KO's 13.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.7% | +15.3% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +28.6% | -1.5% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +140.7% | +94.2% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +167.1% | +165.5% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +447.2% | +576.0% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +34.0% | +24.8% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 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 WMT's -0.00 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs WMT's 89.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.00x | -0.04x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $135.16 | $1096.50 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $93.43 | $846.80 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.5% | +89.6% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 45.9 | 43.8 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 18.3M | 1.9M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: WMT as "Buy", COST as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 15.2% upside for WMT (target: $139) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.46% vs COST's 0.50%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $139.44 | $1085.57 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 66 | 58 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.8% | +0.5% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 52 | 22 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.94 | $4.91 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.8% | +0.2% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Risk & Volatility). COST leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
WMT vs COST vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is WMT or COST or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is the stronger pick with 8.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). The Coca-Cola Company (KO) offers the better valuation at 27. 2x trailing P/E (25. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Walmart Inc. (WMT) a "Buy" — based on 66 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 — WMT or COST or KO?
On trailing P/E, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the cheapest at 27.
2x versus Costco Wholesale Corporation at 53. 9x. On forward P/E, The Coca-Cola Company is actually cheaper at 25. 3x. 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 Walmart Inc. 's 3. 79x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — WMT or COST or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Walmart Inc.
(WMT) delivered a total return of +167. 1%, compared to +65. 6% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: COST returned +576. 0% 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.
04Which is safer — WMT or COST or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Walmart Inc. 's -0. 00β — meaning WMT is approximately -98% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 28% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — WMT or COST or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is pulling ahead at 8.
2% 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 10. 0% for Costco Wholesale Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, COST leads at 6. 6% 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 — WMT or COST or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 2. 9% for Costco Wholesale 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 3. 8% for COST. 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 WMT or COST or KO 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 Walmart Inc. 's 3. 79x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) trades at 25. 3x forward P/E versus 47. 9x for Costco Wholesale Corporation — 22. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for WMT: 15. 2% to $139. 44.
08Which pays a better dividend — WMT or COST or KO?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) offers the highest yield at 2. 5%, versus 0. 5% for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST).
09Is WMT or COST or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Walmart Inc.
(WMT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 00), 0. 8% yield, +447. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WMT: +447. 2%, COST: +576. 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 WMT and COST and KO?
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.
WMT, KO pay a dividend while COST 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.