Beverages - Alcoholic
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
YHC vs SAM vs STZ vs BUD vs TAP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Beverages - Alcoholic
Beverages - Wineries & Distilleries
Beverages - Alcoholic
Beverages - Alcoholic
YHC vs SAM vs STZ vs BUD vs TAP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Beverages - Alcoholic | Beverages - Alcoholic | Beverages - Wineries & Distilleries | Beverages - Alcoholic | Beverages - Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $12M | $2.18B | $26.05B | $138.11B | $8.10B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2M | $2.09B | $9.38B | $119.82B | $11.19B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-36M | $-61M | $1.11B | $12.57B | $-2.11B |
| Gross Margin | 4.6% | 45.2% | 52.0% | 55.2% | 37.8% |
| Operating Margin | -8.9% | -3.8% | 34.5% | 31.7% | -20.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 20.6x | 12.7x | 18.8x | 9.2x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $38M | $12.11B | $72.17B | $6.30B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $223M | $68M | $11.17B | $897M |
YHC vs SAM vs STZ vs BUD vs TAP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| LQR House Inc. (YHC) | 100 | 1.8 | -98.2% |
| The Boston Beer Com… (SAM) | 100 | 67.6 | -32.4% |
| Constellation Brand… (STZ) | 100 | 68.0 | -32.0% |
| Anheuser-Busch InBe… (BUD) | 100 | 160.3 | +60.3% |
| Molson Coors Bevera… (TAP) | 100 | 75.2 | -24.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: YHC vs SAM vs STZ vs BUD vs TAP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
YHC is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 123.2%, EPS growth -24.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 99.5%
- 123.2% revenue growth vs TAP's -4.2%
SAM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 32.0% 10Y total return vs BUD's -24.5%
STZ has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 0.26, yield 2.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.26, current ratio 0.92x
- Beta 0.26, yield 2.7%, current ratio 0.92x
- 11.8% margin vs YHC's -17.2%
BUD is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum and efficiency is your priority.
- +24.5% vs YHC's -54.6%
- 6.0% ROA vs YHC's -103.3%, ROIC 7.5% vs -16.7%
TAP ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value and dividends.
- Lower P/E (9.2x vs 18.8x)
- 4.5% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs STZ's 2.7%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 123.2% revenue growth vs TAP's -4.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.2x vs 18.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 11.8% margin vs YHC's -17.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.26 vs YHC's 0.92 | |
| Dividends | 4.5% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs STZ's 2.7%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +24.5% vs YHC's -54.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.0% ROA vs YHC's -103.3%, ROIC 7.5% vs -16.7% |
YHC vs SAM vs STZ vs BUD vs TAP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
YHC vs SAM vs STZ vs BUD vs TAP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TAP leads in 2 of 6 categories
BUD leads 1 • YHC leads 0 • SAM leads 0 • STZ leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — STZ and BUD and TAP each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BUD is the larger business by revenue, generating $119.8B annually — 56967.5x YHC's $2M. STZ is the more profitable business, keeping 11.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to YHC's -17.2%. On growth, TAP holds the edge at +2.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2M | $2.1B | $9.4B | $119.8B | $11.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$36M | $14M | $3.7B | $38.8B | -$1.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$36M | -$61M | $1.1B | $12.6B | -$2.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$23M | $191M | $1.8B | $32.2B | $1.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +4.6% | +45.2% | +52.0% | +55.2% | +37.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -8.9% | -3.8% | +34.5% | +31.7% | -20.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -17.2% | -2.9% | +11.8% | +10.5% | -18.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -10.7% | +9.1% | +18.8% | +26.9% | +10.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -46.0% | +1.7% | -9.8% | +0.4% | +2.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -141.9% | -7.4% | -15.0% | +32.3% | +35.6% |
Valuation Metrics
TAP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 20.5x trailing earnings, SAM trades at a 27% valuation discount to BUD's 28.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, SAM's 8.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than BUD's 9.5x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $12M | $2.2B | $26.1B | $138.1B | $8.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6M | $2.0B | $38.1B | $199.1B | $13.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.20x | 20.50x | -333.89x | 28.06x | -3.98x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 20.56x | 12.70x | 18.81x | 9.17x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 8.45x | 9.37x | 9.47x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.74x | 1.04x | 2.55x | 2.31x | 0.73x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 2.54x | 3.82x | 1.85x | 0.80x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 10.09x | 13.44x | 12.34x | 7.58x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — SAM and STZ each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
STZ delivers a 13.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $-132 for YHC. SAM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to STZ's 1.70x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BUD scores 9/9 vs YHC's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -132.2% | -7.3% | +13.9% | +13.8% | -18.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -103.3% | -5.0% | +5.1% | +6.0% | -8.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -16.7% | +15.5% | +13.0% | +7.5% | -10.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.6% | +14.8% | +18.0% | +8.7% | -11.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.04x | 1.70x | 0.81x | 0.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | -$186M | $12.0B | $61.0B | $5.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $223M | $68M | $11.2B | $897M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $38M | $12.1B | $72.2B | $6.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 5.47x | 2.53x | -9.99x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BUD leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BUD five years ago would be worth $11,236 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $220 for YHC. Over the past 12 months, BUD leads with a +24.5% total return vs YHC's -54.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BUD at 8.4% vs YHC's -72.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -10.4% | +1.5% | +7.9% | +26.0% | -8.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -54.6% | -15.9% | -18.7% | +24.5% | -20.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.8% | -35.0% | -29.0% | +27.5% | -24.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.8% | -81.8% | -30.1% | +12.4% | -14.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.8% | +32.0% | +12.6% | -24.5% | -41.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -72.0% | -13.4% | -10.8% | +8.4% | -9.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BUD and TAP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TAP is the less volatile stock with a -0.01 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than YHC's 0.92 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BUD currently trades 96.8% from its 52-week high vs YHC's 7.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.92x | 0.29x | 0.26x | 0.28x | -0.01x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.14 | $264.46 | $196.91 | $82.91 | $57.57 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.53 | $185.34 | $126.45 | $56.97 | $40.64 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +7.5% | +76.7% | +76.3% | +96.8% | +74.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.2 | 28.7 | 45.9 | 70.7 | 47.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 132K | 199K | 1.8M | 2.0M | 2.9M |
Analyst Outlook
TAP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SAM as "Hold", STZ as "Buy", BUD as "Buy", TAP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 21.7% upside for SAM (target: $247) vs 10.9% for BUD (target: $89). For income investors, TAP offers the higher dividend yield at 4.46% vs BUD's 1.63%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $246.86 | $175.70 | $89.00 | $48.30 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 31 | 46 | 45 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.7% | +1.6% | +4.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 4 | 0 | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $4.03 | $1.31 | $1.92 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.6% | +9.4% | +4.3% | +0.7% | +8.0% |
TAP leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). BUD leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
YHC vs SAM vs STZ vs BUD vs TAP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is YHC or SAM or STZ or BUD or TAP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, LQR House Inc.
(YHC) is the stronger pick with 123. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 2% for Molson Coors Beverage Company (TAP). The Boston Beer Company, Inc. (SAM) offers the better valuation at 20. 5x trailing P/E (20. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Constellation Brands, Inc. (STZ) a "Buy" — based on 46 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 — YHC or SAM or STZ or BUD or TAP?
On trailing P/E, The Boston Beer Company, Inc.
(SAM) is the cheapest at 20. 5x versus Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV at 28. 1x. On forward P/E, Molson Coors Beverage Company is actually cheaper at 9. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — YHC or SAM or STZ or BUD or TAP?
Over the past 5 years, Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV (BUD) delivered a total return of +12.
4%, compared to -97. 8% for LQR House Inc. (YHC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SAM returned +32. 0% versus YHC's -97. 8%. 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 — YHC or SAM or STZ or BUD or TAP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Molson Coors Beverage Company (TAP) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
01β versus LQR House Inc. 's 0. 92β — meaning YHC is approximately -7718% more volatile than TAP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Boston Beer Company, Inc. (SAM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 170% for Constellation Brands, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — YHC or SAM or STZ or BUD or TAP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), LQR House Inc.
(YHC) is pulling ahead at 123. 2% versus -4. 2% for Molson Coors Beverage Company (TAP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Boston Beer Company, Inc. grew EPS 95. 5% year-over-year, compared to -302. 8% for Molson Coors Beverage Company. Over a 3-year CAGR, YHC leads at 99. 5% 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 — YHC or SAM or STZ or BUD or TAP?
Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV (BUD) is the more profitable company, earning 9.
8% net margin versus -909. 6% for LQR House Inc. — meaning it keeps 9. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: STZ leads at 35. 5% versus -739. 0% for YHC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BUD leads at 55. 3%, 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 YHC or SAM or STZ or BUD or TAP more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Molson Coors Beverage Company (TAP) trades at 9.
2x forward P/E versus 20. 6x for The Boston Beer Company, Inc. — 11. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SAM: 21. 7% to $246. 86.
08Which pays a better dividend — YHC or SAM or STZ or BUD or TAP?
In this comparison, TAP (4.
5% yield), STZ (2. 7% yield), BUD (1. 6% yield) pay a dividend. YHC, SAM do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is YHC or SAM or STZ or BUD or TAP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Molson Coors Beverage Company (TAP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
01), 4. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TAP: -41. 4%, YHC: -97. 8%), 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 YHC and SAM and STZ and BUD and TAP?
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: YHC is a small-cap high-growth stock; SAM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; STZ is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; BUD is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; TAP is a small-cap income-oriented stock. STZ, BUD, TAP pay a dividend while YHC, SAM 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.