Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 45.3x · EV/EBITDA 33.1x · ROE 26.8%. (1996–2025 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $85.9B | $75.5B | $106.5B | $121.9B | $108.3B | $102.9B | $98.9B | $69.5B | $55.5B | $73.1B | $53.2B |
| Enterprise Value | $83.8B | $73.4B | $105.3B | $119.6B | $107.0B | $101.6B | $97.7B | $68.7B | $54.9B | $72.5B | $52.8B |
| P/E Ratio → | 45.27 | 39.53 | 70.55 | 74.82 | 90.64 | 74.45 | 70.06 | 62.93 | 55.93 | 89.15 | 73.90 |
| P/S Ratio | 10.36 | 9.10 | 14.21 | 17.07 | 17.15 | 18.57 | 21.51 | 16.54 | 14.59 | 21.69 | 17.44 |
| P/B Ratio | 10.47 | 9.15 | 17.88 | 14.81 | 15.41 | 15.67 | 19.17 | 16.66 | 15.38 | 18.76 | 15.97 |
| P/FCF | 43.69 | 38.40 | 63.98 | 82.20 | 160.26 | 93.68 | 76.27 | 69.25 | 51.10 | 81.67 | 89.25 |
| P/OCF | 40.93 | 35.98 | 55.22 | 70.97 | 121.96 | 89.02 | 72.51 | 62.39 | 47.81 | 73.97 | 75.84 |
P/E links to full P/E history page with 30-year chart
Enterprise-value multiples — capital-structure-neutral measures of total business value
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 8.85 | 14.06 | 16.75 | 16.95 | 18.33 | 21.25 | 16.35 | 14.42 | 21.53 | 17.32 |
| EV / EBITDA | 33.07 | 28.97 | 52.39 | 59.14 | 64.98 | 54.97 | 57.83 | 46.93 | 40.96 | 58.14 | 46.90 |
| EV / EBIT | 34.64 | 29.49 | 52.22 | 57.82 | 68.04 | 56.38 | 59.85 | 48.96 | 42.78 | 60.51 | 48.66 |
| EV / FCF | — | 37.34 | 63.29 | 80.65 | 158.33 | 92.47 | 75.36 | 68.46 | 50.52 | 81.08 | 88.61 |
Margins and return-on-capital ratios measuring operating efficiency
Full margin charts and quarterly trend are on the Earnings History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 55.8% | 55.8% | 54.0% | 53.1% | 50.3% | 56.1% | 59.2% | 60.0% | 60.3% | 63.5% | 63.7% |
| Operating Margin | 29.2% | 29.2% | 25.8% | 27.4% | 25.1% | 32.4% | 35.5% | 33.4% | 33.7% | 35.6% | 35.6% |
| Net Profit Margin | 23.0% | 23.0% | 20.1% | 22.8% | 18.9% | 24.9% | 30.7% | 26.4% | 26.1% | 24.4% | 23.4% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 26.8% | 26.8% | 21.3% | 21.4% | 17.5% | 23.5% | 30.2% | 28.5% | 26.5% | 22.7% | 17.5% |
| ROA | 21.5% | 21.5% | 17.3% | 18.1% | 14.8% | 19.7% | 24.8% | 22.9% | 21.3% | 18.4% | 14.7% |
| ROIC | 33.1% | 33.1% | 27.0% | 25.2% | 21.7% | 29.2% | 33.3% | 33.2% | 30.4% | 28.5% | 29.1% |
| ROCE | 31.9% | 31.9% | 25.5% | 24.7% | 22.4% | 29.2% | 32.9% | 33.3% | 31.5% | 30.3% | 24.5% |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | — | — | 0.06 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | — | — | 0.19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.25 | -0.19 | -0.28 | -0.19 | -0.20 | -0.23 | -0.19 | -0.18 | -0.14 | -0.11 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | -0.82 | -0.82 | -0.58 | -1.14 | -0.79 | -0.72 | -0.70 | -0.55 | -0.48 | -0.42 | -0.34 |
| Debt / FCF | — | -1.06 | -0.70 | -1.55 | -1.93 | -1.21 | -0.91 | -0.80 | -0.59 | -0.59 | -0.63 |
| Interest Coverage | 377.14 | 377.14 | 72.31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Net cash position: cash ($2.1B) exceeds total debt ($0)
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 3.70 | 3.70 | 3.32 | 4.81 | 4.76 | 4.85 | 4.19 | 3.50 | 3.00 | 3.72 | 3.04 |
| Quick Ratio | 3.15 | 3.15 | 2.65 | 3.97 | 3.82 | 4.24 | 3.74 | 2.96 | 2.54 | 3.27 | 2.70 |
| Cash Ratio | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.40 | 2.80 | 2.66 | 3.19 | 2.75 | 2.01 | 1.59 | 2.14 | 1.27 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.83 | 0.97 | 0.74 | 0.76 | 0.71 | 0.74 | 0.82 | 0.84 | 0.70 | 0.73 |
| Inventory Turnover | 4.58 | 4.58 | 4.67 | 3.44 | 3.35 | 4.10 | 5.63 | 4.66 | 5.44 | 4.81 | 6.84 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 71.20 | 59.51 | 61.04 | 58.77 | 59.06 | 52.86 | 46.95 | 46.46 | 48.70 | 68.59 |
Earnings, FCF, buyback, and dividend yields — total returns to shareholders
Full dividend history and growth charts are on the Dividend History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 2.2% | 2.5% | 1.4% | 1.3% | 1.1% | 1.3% | 1.4% | 1.6% | 1.8% | 1.1% | 1.4% |
| FCF Yield | 2.3% | 2.6% | 1.6% | 1.2% | 0.6% | 1.1% | 1.3% | 1.4% | 2.0% | 1.2% | 1.1% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.1% | 0.1% | 3.5% | 0.5% | 0.7% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 1.0% | 2.4% | 0.5% | 4.2% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.1% | 0.1% | 3.5% | 0.5% | 0.7% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 1.0% | 2.4% | 0.5% | 4.2% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $2.0B | $2.0B | $2.1B | $2.1B | $2.1B | $2.1B | $2.2B | $2.3B | $2.3B | $2.4B |
Includes 30+ ratios · 30 years · Updated daily
Live VCP patterns, Cup & Handle overlays, support/resistance, and AI trade plans.
High-probability breakout stocks crossing their pivot across 5 pattern engines.
DCF models, multiple analysis, and analyst estimates.
10-year return with dividends reinvested.
Compare growth, multiples, and margins vs sector.
Quick answers to the most common questions about buying MNST stock.
Monster Beverage Corporation's current P/E ratio is 45.3x. The historical average is 39.8x. This places it at the 67th percentile of its historical range.
Monster Beverage Corporation's current EV/EBITDA is 33.1x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 26.4x.
Monster Beverage Corporation's return on equity (ROE) is 26.8%. This is above the typical threshold of 15-20% considered good for most companies. The historical average is 28.5%.
Based on historical data, Monster Beverage Corporation is trading at a P/E of 45.3x. This is at the 67th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Monster Beverage Corporation has 55.8% gross margin and 29.2% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Celsius share gains and margin pressure
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Premium Multiple Reflects Maturation
MNST trades at 48.3x trailing earnings and 35.3x EV/EBITDA, per recent filings, a premium to mature peers but a discount to hyper-growth Celsius, suggesting the market prices a maturing compounder.
The forward P/E of 20.3x implies a sharp earnings acceleration that may not fully materialize if margin expansion stalls. The PEG of 6.0x, based on reported figures, indicates the market is paying a high price for growth relative to near-term EPS gains, which appears inconsistent with the decelerating ROIC trend. Investors should monitor whether the multiple compresses as growth normalizes.
Margin Stability Amid Cost Pressures
Gross margin held at 55.9% in Q2 2026, up from 53.2% in Q4 2024, per financial statements, while operating margin expanded to 29.2%, indicating cost management offsetting inflationary pressures.
The stability in gross margin suggests that pricing power and mix shifts are offsetting aluminum and freight costs, but the sequential dip in operating margin from 31.0% in Q1 2026 to 29.2% in Q2 2026 hints at rising SG&A, possibly from marketing investments to counter Celsius. Net margin of 23.0% remains robust, yet the in-line EPS despite 20.2% revenue growth suggests limited operating leverage in the near term.
ROIC Volatility Signals Efficiency Ceiling
ROIC fluctuated between 5.9% and 9.5% over the past ten quarters, per reported data, with Q2 2026 at 8.0%, indicating a capital-light model but no clear compounding trend.
The lack of a sustained upward trend in ROIC, despite revenue acceleration, suggests that incremental capital is being deployed into acquisitions and working capital rather than high-return organic projects. The recent acquisition of Bang Energy assets may temporarily depress returns as integration costs are absorbed. Investors should watch whether ROIC can exceed its prior peak of 9.5% as the company scales internationally.
Working Capital Drag Eases but Persists
Cash conversion cycle improved to 74 days in Q2 2026 from 104 days in Q4 2024, per financial statements, driven by faster inventory turnover and extended payables, yet remains elevated versus beverage peers.
The reduction in DIO from 100 to 69 days and the extension of DPO from 57 to 63 days, based on reported figures, indicate better inventory management and supplier leverage. However, DSO of 68 days remains high, suggesting that distributor financing is a structural feature of the model. The improvement in CCC is positive but may not be sustainable if growth requires higher inventory buffers.
Debt-Free Balance Sheet Enhances Flexibility
Monster eliminated its total debt by Q2 2026, down from $748.8M in Q3 2024, per recent filings, with interest coverage exceeding 1,250x, indicating minimal refinancing risk and ample capacity for capital returns.
The transition to a zero-leverage position, as reported, provides significant strategic flexibility, allowing the company to fund acquisitions or buybacks without external financing. The absence of debt also insulates the company from rising rate environments, a key advantage over levered peers. However, the lack of debt may also signal a conservative capital structure that could be optimized to enhance shareholder returns.
Ample Liquidity Buffers Against Shocks
Current ratio improved to 3.73 in Q2 2026 from 3.32 in Q4 2024, per financial statements, with cash at $2.2B, indicating a fortress liquidity position that can withstand severe demand or cost shocks.
The quick ratio of 3.22, excluding inventory, remains robust, suggesting that even a sharp inventory write-down would not impair liquidity. The high cash balance, as reported, provides a cushion for potential legal settlements or competitive responses. This liquidity strength supports the company's ability to weather category disruptions, though it may also indicate under-leveraging of the balance sheet.
Premium Valuation vs. Staple Peers
MNST's P/E of 48.3x and EV/EBITDA of 35.3x, per recent filings, exceed National Beverage's 16.0x and 10.5x, but trail Celsius's 116.4x, reflecting a middle-ground growth and profitability profile.
Monster's ROE of 6.5% in Q2 2026 is below National Beverage's 32.2%, but its net margin of 23.0% is superior to Celsius's 4.3%, indicating a more mature and profitable business model. The valuation gap to Celsius suggests the market is pricing Monster's growth as more sustainable but less explosive. Investors should monitor whether Monster can defend its premium as Celsius scales.
Misapplied Metric: P/E on GAAP Earnings
The most misapplied ratio for Monster is the trailing P/E, which fails to account for the non-recurring nature of acquisition-related costs and the economic dilution from stock-based compensation, per reported figures.
Trailing P/E of 48.3x overstates the cost of the business because it includes one-time charges from the Bang acquisition and ignores the recurring SBC expense that reduces economic earnings. A more appropriate metric is EV/EBIT or EV/EBITDA, which normalizes for capital structure and non-operating items. Based on reported data, EV/EBITDA of 35.3x still appears rich, but it better reflects the underlying cash-generative model.