Beverages - Wineries & Distilleries
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
WVVI vs MNST vs CELH vs FIZZ vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
WVVI vs MNST vs CELH vs FIZZ vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Beverages - Wineries & Distilleries | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $14M | $74.29B | $8.80B | $3.29B | $337.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $37M | $8.29B | $2.97B | $1.20B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1M | $1.91B | $149M | $187M | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 60.5% | 55.8% | 49.6% | 37.2% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | -2.4% | 29.2% | 10.4% | 19.7% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 33.7x | 21.3x | 17.6x | 24.1x |
| Total Debt | $15.52B | $0.00 | $670M | $72M | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $411M | $2.09B | $399M | $194M | $10.27B |
WVVI vs MNST vs CELH vs FIZZ vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Willamette Valley V… (WVVI) | 100 | 47.9 | -52.1% |
| Monster Beverage Co… (MNST) | 100 | 211.3 | +111.3% |
| Celsius Holdings, I… (CELH) | 100 | 1108.7 | +1008.7% |
| National Beverage C… (FIZZ) | 100 | 123.4 | +23.4% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 168.0 | +68.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: WVVI vs MNST vs CELH vs FIZZ vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
WVVI ranks third and is worth considering specifically for dividends.
- 100.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
MNST has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 10.7%, EPS growth 30.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 9.5%
- Beta 0.26 vs CELH's 1.29
- +25.4% vs WVVI's -49.3%
CELH is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 41.3% 10Y total return vs MNST's 206.3%
- PEG 0.46 vs MNST's 4.21
- 85.5% revenue growth vs WVVI's -100.0%
FIZZ is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 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 24.1x)
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is quality.
- 27.8% margin vs WVVI's -3.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 85.5% revenue growth vs WVVI's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (17.6x vs 24.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs WVVI's -3.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.26 vs CELH's 1.29 | |
| Dividends | 100.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +25.4% vs WVVI's -49.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 27.1% ROA vs WVVI's -1.1%, ROIC 57.9% vs -2.6% |
WVVI vs MNST vs CELH vs FIZZ vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
WVVI vs MNST vs CELH vs FIZZ vs KO — 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
FIZZ leads 1 • WVVI leads 0 • MNST leads 0 • CELH leads 0 • 3 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)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 1318.9x WVVI's $37M. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to WVVI's -3.3%. On growth, CELH holds the edge at +137.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $37M | $8.3B | $3.0B | $1.2B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2M | $2.5B | $336M | $258M | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1M | $1.9B | $149M | $187M | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$3M | $2.0B | $293M | $157M | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +60.5% | +55.8% | +49.6% | +37.2% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.4% | +29.2% | +10.4% | +19.7% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.3% | +23.0% | +5.0% | +15.6% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -8.5% | +23.7% | +9.9% | +13.1% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -10.9% | +17.6% | +137.7% | -1.0% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -94.1% | +64.3% | +120.0% | 0.0% | +18.2% |
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), KO offers better value at 2.31x vs MNST's 4.89x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $14M | $74.3B | $8.8B | $3.3B | $337.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $15.1B | $72.2B | $9.1B | $3.2B | $372.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -4.53x | 39.16x | 137.04x | 17.67x | 25.80x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 33.72x | 21.32x | 17.56x | 24.11x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.89x | 2.93x | 2.37x | 2.31x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 28.50x | 18.22x | 12.37x | 25.17x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 8.96x | 3.50x | 2.74x | 7.04x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 9.06x | 2.76x | 7.42x | 9.87x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 37.79x | 27.22x | 19.32x | 63.75x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — MNST and FIZZ each lead in 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 $-2 for WVVI. FIZZ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.16x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MNST scores 7/9 vs WVVI's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -1.8% | +25.7% | +6.4% | +39.3% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.1% | +20.8% | +3.1% | +27.1% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.6% | +33.1% | +19.7% | +57.9% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.1% | +31.9% | +17.2% | +40.4% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.23x | — | 0.23x | 0.16x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $15.1B | -$2.1B | $271M | -$122M | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $411M | $2.1B | $399M | $194M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $15.5B | $0 | $670M | $72M | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.69x | 372.36x | 2.92x | — | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KO 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 $1,920 for WVVI. Over the past 12 months, MNST leads with a +25.4% total return vs WVVI's -49.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KO at 9.7% vs WVVI's -21.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -8.6% | -0.2% | -28.3% | +11.1% | +14.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -49.3% | +25.4% | -4.3% | -19.4% | +11.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -51.0% | +28.7% | -3.8% | -25.7% | +31.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -80.8% | +66.5% | +109.4% | -13.2% | +61.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.3% | +206.3% | +4129.6% | +82.6% | +111.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -21.2% | +8.8% | -1.3% | -9.4% | +9.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — WVVI and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WVVI is the less volatile stock with a -0.25 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 WVVI's 40.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.25x | 0.26x | 1.29x | 0.29x | -0.09x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $7.18 | $87.38 | $66.74 | $47.89 | $82.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.49 | $58.09 | $31.80 | $31.21 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +40.3% | +86.9% | +51.3% | +73.4% | +95.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.5 | 54.5 | 39.1 | 56.8 | 61.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3K | 5.2M | 7.3M | 220K | 13.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — WVVI and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MNST as "Buy", CELH as "Buy", FIZZ as "Sell", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 72.2% upside for CELH (target: $59) vs -3.3% for FIZZ (target: $34). For income investors, WVVI offers the higher dividend yield at 100.00% vs CELH's 0.46%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Sell | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $85.38 | $59.00 | $34.00 | $85.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 43 | 22 | 8 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +100.0% | — | +0.5% | +9.2% | +2.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | — | 1 | 4 | 35 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $194.20 | — | $0.16 | $3.25 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.1% | +0.5% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). FIZZ leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
WVVI vs MNST vs CELH vs FIZZ vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is WVVI or MNST or CELH or FIZZ or KO 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 -100. 0% for Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc. (WVVI). 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 Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) a "Buy" — based on 43 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 — WVVI or MNST or CELH or FIZZ or KO?
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 — WVVI or MNST or CELH or FIZZ or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) delivered a total return of +109. 4%, compared to -80. 8% for Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc. (WVVI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CELH returned +41. 3% versus WVVI's -59. 3%. 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 — WVVI or MNST or CELH or FIZZ or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc.
(WVVI) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 25β versus Celsius Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 29β — meaning CELH is approximately -615% more volatile than WVVI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, National Beverage Corp. (FIZZ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 16% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — WVVI or MNST or CELH or FIZZ or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Celsius Holdings, Inc.
(CELH) is pulling ahead at 85. 5% versus -100. 0% for Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc. (WVVI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Monster Beverage Corporation grew EPS 30. 2% year-over-year, compared to -44. 4% for Celsius Holdings, 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 — WVVI or MNST or CELH or FIZZ or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -3. 3% for Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MNST leads at 29. 2% versus -2. 4% for WVVI. 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 WVVI or MNST or CELH or FIZZ 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, 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 — WVVI or MNST or CELH or FIZZ or KO?
In this comparison, WVVI (100.
0% yield), FIZZ (9. 2% yield), KO (2. 6% yield), CELH (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. MNST does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is WVVI or MNST or CELH or FIZZ or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc.
(WVVI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 25), 100. 0% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WVVI: -59. 3%, 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 WVVI and MNST and CELH and FIZZ 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.
In terms of investment character: WVVI is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MNST is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CELH is a small-cap high-growth stock; FIZZ is a small-cap deep-value stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. WVVI, FIZZ, KO pay a dividend while MNST, CELH 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.