Food and beverage · Coca-Cola vs Monster Beverage · to 2026-10-23

KO vs MNST stock comparison

→Coca-Cola (KO) is 4.4 times the size of Monster Beverage (MNST) at $398.9B against $90.5B, and Coca-Cola passes more of the TenQ Score checks, 27 of 36 against 26.

KO +36.1% · MNST +32.2% over 1Y
90.7104.8118.8132.9146.9Oct '25Jan '26Mar '26Jun '26Aug '26Oct '26
The TenQ Radar

TenQ Score: KO vs MNST

Each company is scored on the same checks, computed from its own filings: value, growth, quality, financial health, shareholder returns and trend. The fuller the shape, the more checks it passes.

→No part of the score separates them by more than 2 checks, and the widest gap is on Growth.

All checksKO27/36MNST26/36

→Coca-Cola brings in $50.1B of revenue a year to Monster Beverage's $9.2B, 5.4 times as much. Coca-Cola keeps 28.6% of revenue as profit against 23.1% at Monster Beverage.

I

Value: KO vs MNST

KO1/6MNST0/6

Coca-Cola costs less for each dollar of profit, a P/E of 27.9x against 42.7x. Against its own past, Coca-Cola trades above its usual 23.1x and Monster Beverage above its usual 17.8x.

27.9xKO42.7xMNSTwhat you pay per $1 of profit
8.0xKO9.8xMNSTwhat you pay per $1 of revenue
3.6%KO2.3%MNSTcash earned per $ of price
27.0xKO31.1xMNSTwhole-business multiple
Valuation history

Is KO or MNST more expensive against its earnings, sales and book value?

→On the latest figures, KO's price to earnings is 27.9x, against 42.7x at MNST.

What this measures

What the market has paid for each dollar of earnings, sales or book value, every year, with today's multiple as the last point and the median drawn across.

What good looks like. There is no good level. What matters is the distance from the company's own history, and whether the business has changed enough to justify it.

If it rises or falls. A multiple above its own median means the market expects more than it used to, so more has to go right. Below the median means the opposite, and the question is whether the pessimism is deserved. A multiple can also fall because earnings rose, which is the good way.

Free cash flow yield

Which earns more free cash flow for its price, KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's free cash flow yield is 3.6%, against 2.3% at MNST.

What this measures

Free cash flow divided by market value: the cash the business generates for every dollar you pay for it. The inverse of a price-to-cash multiple.

What good looks like. A yield at or above the company's own history, and one that compares well with what cash is worth elsewhere.

If it rises or falls. The yield rises when cash grows or the price falls, so a high yield is either a bargain or a warning about the cash continuing. Read it beside the cash conversion chart, which shows whether the cash is holding up.

Enterprise value

How do KO and MNST compare on EV/EBITDA, debt included?

→On the latest figures, KO's EV/EBITDA is 27.0x, against 31.1x at MNST.

What this measures

Enterprise value over EBITDA. Enterprise value is the market value of the equity plus debt, less cash and short-term investments - what it would cost to buy the whole company outright. EBITDA is operating profit before depreciation and amortisation.

What good looks like. A multiple below what similar businesses change hands at, and one that has not run far above the company's own past.

If it rises or falls. It rises when the price rises or profit falls, and debt moves it too: two companies on the same price-to-earnings can sit far apart here if one is carrying borrowings the other is not.

Reverse discounted cash flow

How much growth is priced into KO and MNST shares?

Growth priced infree cash flow after stock pay, a year, next ten years
KO12.3%
MNST18.9%
Growth deliveredfree cash flow after stock pay, a year, last 10 years
KO-2.1%
MNST14.3%

KO DCF calculator →MNST DCF calculator →

→KO's price assumes its free cash flow grows 12.3% a year for the next ten years, against -2.1% a year delivered; MNST's assumes it grows 18.9% a year, against 14.3% a year delivered.

What this measures

A reverse discounted cash flow. It takes what the market pays for the shares today (market value less the cash the company holds) and works out how fast free cash flow would have to grow each year, for ten years, to be worth exactly that. Free cash flow here is after the stock the company pays its staff, which dilutes every other shareholder, and after interest, so debt is already paid for in it. Future cash is discounted at the 10-year Treasury yield plus 5 points, and grows 2.5% a year after year ten.

What good looks like. A priced-in rate below what its record suggests: the free cash flow growth it delivered over the longest span its filings allow, slowed halfway toward the economy's growth, because very few companies keep a past pace for another decade.

If it rises or falls. It rises when the share price rises or free cash flow falls, and when interest rates rise: a higher Treasury yield means the same price needs more growth to justify it.

What does “Value” actually mean?

Value asks what you pay for each dollar of earnings, sales or cash a business produces. A high multiple is not automatically bad, since fast growers can earn theirs, but a price far above a company's own history means the market expects a lot to go right. Each company is measured against its own past and its sector.

How each scored · KO 1/6 · MNST 0/6

Value, check by check

KOMNST
Cheaper than its own history (earnings)KOFails27.93 vs 23.09MNSTFails42.74 vs 17.84
Earnings yield beats the 10-year Treasury (5.1%)KOFails3.6% vs 5.1%MNSTFails2.3% vs 5.1%
Better cash yield than its own historyKOFails3.6% vs 4.1%MNSTFails2.3% vs 6.2%
Free cash flow yield above 3%KOPasses3.6% vs 3.0%MNSTFails2.3% vs 3.0%
Cheap on enterprise value (under 14x EBITDA)KOFails27.03 vs 14.00 (fixed yardstick)MNSTFails31.07 vs 14.00 (fixed yardstick)
Priced for less growth than its record suggestsKOFails12.3% a year priced in vs 0.9%: -2.1% free cash flow growth over the last 10 years, slowing halfway to 4.0%MNSTFails18.9% a year priced in vs 9.2%: 14.3% free cash flow growth over the last 10 years, slowing halfway to 4.0%
II

Growth: KO vs MNST

KO4/6MNST6/6

Monster Beverage grew revenue faster over the last twelve months, +20.4% against +6.5% at Coca-Cola, 14 percentage points apart. Over three years the order is reversed: Monster Beverage grew +9.5% a year against +3.7% at Coca-Cola.

+6.5%KO+20.4%MNSTvs the year before
+3.7%KO+9.5%MNSTa year, compounded
+17.5%KO+35.2%MNSTnet income growth
+11.2%KO+16.9%MNSTa year, compounded
Revenue history

Is KO or MNST growing revenue faster?

→On the latest figures, KO's revenue is $50.1B, against $9.2B at MNST.

What this measures

The money customers paid, before any costs are taken out. Each bar is one quarter or, on the annual view, a full financial year; the last annual bar may be the trailing twelve months, which the footnote marks.

What good looks like. Growth that repeats, rather than one strong year carrying the chart, and a trailing twelve months keeping pace with the last full year.

If it rises or falls. Revenue is the hardest line to flatter, so a rise is the most trustworthy kind of growth. A fall puts pressure on every margin below it, because costs rarely come down as quickly as sales do.

Profit history

Is KO or MNST growing its net profit faster?

→On the latest figures, KO's net profit is $14.3B, against $2.1B at MNST.

What this measures

What is left after every cost, including tax and interest. The bottom line of the income statement.

What good looks like. Profit growing at least as fast as revenue, which means the business is keeping more of each sale as it gets bigger.

If it rises or falls. Profit can move for reasons revenue cannot explain - a one-off charge, a tax change, a write-down - so a single sharp year is worth checking against the margin chart before reading it as a trend.

Growth rate

How fast is revenue growing at KO and at MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's revenue growth is 6.5%, against 20.4% at MNST.

What this measures

How much revenue and earnings changed against the year before - the trailing twelve months against the twelve before them at each quarter, or one point per fiscal year. It is the speed of the business, not its size.

What good looks like. The earnings line above the revenue line: profits growing faster than sales means each new dollar of sales arrives more profitably than the last.

If it rises or falls. A high growth rate off a small base is easy and gets harder every year, so slowing growth in a large business is normal rather than a warning. Earnings falling while revenue grows is the combination worth understanding: costs are rising faster than sales.

Per-share growth

Is revenue per share growing faster at KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's revenue per share is $11.62, against $9.33 at MNST.

What this measures

Revenue and free cash flow, each divided by the number of shares in issue and adjusted for splits so old and new years compare honestly. Both lines rising means each share owns more of the business's sales and cash.

What good looks like. Both lines rising, and revenue per share growing at least as fast as the company's total revenue, which the answer compares. Faster means buybacks are working for you; slower means new shares are absorbing part of the growth.

If it rises or falls. This is the line that actually reaches you. A company can grow revenue every year and still shrink your slice by issuing shares faster than it grows.

What does “Growth” actually mean?

Growth here is what each company has reported to the SEC, not a forecast: the last year, the three-year pace, and whether growth is speeding up or slowing down. Both companies are measured the same way, so their lines can be read against each other.

How each scored · KO 4/6 · MNST 6/6

Growth, check by check

KOMNST
Outgrew its sector over the last twelve monthsKOPasses6.5% vs 6.4% (sector 70th pct, n=55)MNSTPasses20.4% vs 6.4% (sector 70th pct, n=55)
Sustained growth beats its sector (3 years)KOFails3.7% vs 7.0% (sector 70th pct, n=55)MNSTPasses9.5% vs 7.0% (sector 70th pct, n=55)
Profits grew over the last twelve monthsKOPasses17.5% vs 0.0%MNSTPasses35.2% vs 0.0%
Profit growth beats its sector (3 years)KOFails11.2% vs 13.2% (sector 70th pct, n=36)MNSTPasses16.9% vs 13.2% (sector 70th pct, n=36)
Growth is speeding up, not slowingKOPasseslast twelve months 6.5% vs three-year pace 3.7%MNSTPasseslast twelve months 20.4% vs three-year pace 9.5%
Grew per share, not just in totalKOPasses12.4% vs 0.0%MNSTPasses42.4% vs 0.0%
III

Quality: KO vs MNST

KO6/6MNST6/6

Coca-Cola keeps more of each sale: a gross margin of 61.9% against 55.5%, 6 percentage points more on every dollar of revenue.

61.9%KO55.5%MNSTkept after direct costs
29.6%KO29.2%MNSTkept after running costs
44.2%KO25.8%MNSTprofit on shareholders' money
$14.3BKO$2.1BMNSTlast 12 months
Margins

Which keeps more of each sale as profit, KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's gross margin is 61.9%, against 55.5% at MNST.

What this measures

What survives at three points on the way down the income statement: after the direct cost of the product, after the cost of running the company, and after everything.

What good looks like. Margins that hold or widen as the business grows. The level itself varies enormously by industry, so the shape over time tells you more than the number.

If it rises or falls. A widening margin means pricing power or costs under control. A compressing one means the opposite, and it compounds: on large revenue, two points of margin is a great deal of profit.

Earnings quality

Does profit turn into cash better at KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's operating cash per dollar of profit is 0.6x, against 1.1x at MNST.

What this measures

Reported profit against the cash the business actually collected from operating. Profit is an accounting judgement; cash is not.

What good looks like. Cash at or above profit, year after year. Depreciation and other non-cash charges usually push cash above profit, so roughly 100% or more is healthy.

If it rises or falls. Cash falling behind profit for more than a year is the classic early warning: the sales are booked but the money has not arrived, and it shows up in receivables and inventory. For a lender the comparison behaves differently, because a growing loan book consumes cash.

Returns on capital

Which earns a higher return on its capital, KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's return on equity is 44.2%, against 25.8% at MNST.

What this measures

Two returns side by side: on shareholders' capital (ROE), and on all the capital in the business including debt (ROCE).

What good looks like. Both comfortably above roughly 10%, and close together. A wide gap means borrowing, not operations, is doing the work.

If it rises or falls. A high ROE built on debt looks like quality until the debt has to be refinanced. ROCE is the harder number to flatter, which is why both are shown.

Cash conversion

Which turns more of each sale into free cash flow, KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's free cash flow margin is 28.5%, against 22.8% at MNST.

What this measures

Free cash flow as a share of revenue: how much of each dollar of sales survives both costs and capital spending.

What good looks like. A steady or rising share. Asset-light businesses convert far more than manufacturers, so compare a company with itself.

If it rises or falls. Falling conversion while revenue grows means growth is being bought with capital spending or working capital, which is fine while it lasts and painful when it stops.

Spending intensity

How much of their revenue do KO and MNST spend on R&D, capex and stock pay?

→On the latest figures, KO's capex as a share of revenue is 4.1%, against 1.5% at MNST.

What this measures

Capital spending, research and development, and stock compensation, each as a share of revenue. The three ways a business pays to keep its position.

What good looks like. A share that is stable or falling while revenue grows, which means the cost of competing is not rising with the business.

If it rises or falls. Rising intensity means each new dollar of sales is getting more expensive to win. Falling intensity can mean efficiency, or it can mean under-investment that shows up years later.

Operating leverage

Is operating profit growing faster at KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's operating profit growth is 12.9%, against 30.3% at MNST.

What this measures

How often operating profit grew faster than revenue, year by year. Fixed costs mean profit should rise faster than sales once those costs are covered.

What good looks like. Profit outgrowing revenue in most years, and by a widening margin in the good ones.

If it rises or falls. Leverage cuts both ways: the same fixed costs that multiply profit on the way up multiply the damage when sales fall. A business with strong operating leverage is a better business and a more volatile one.

What does “Quality” actually mean?

Quality asks whether growth turns into real money: how much of each sale is kept as profit, whether that profit arrives as cash, and what return the business earns on the money invested in it.

How each scored · KO 6/6 · MNST 6/6

Quality, check by check

KOMNST
Better gross margins than its sectorKOPasses61.9% vs 36.5% (sector 70th pct, n=52)MNSTPasses55.5% vs 36.5% (sector 70th pct, n=52)
Runs leaner than its sector (operating margin)KOPasses29.6% vs 11.0% (sector 70th pct, n=52)MNSTPasses29.2% vs 11.0% (sector 70th pct, n=52)
Actually profitableKOPassesTTM net income $14.3BMNSTPassesTTM net income $2.1B
Earns well on shareholders' moneyKOPasses44.2% vs 16.1% (sector 70th pct, n=48)MNSTPasses25.8% vs 16.1% (sector 70th pct, n=48)
Earns a real return on the capital it employsKOPasses18.0% vs 10.0%MNSTPasses27.8% vs 10.0%
Profits are cash, not accountingKOPasses1.14 vs 0.80MNSTPasses1.05 vs 0.80
IV

Financial health: KO vs MNST

KO4/6MNST5/6

Monster Beverage carries far less debt for its size, 0.02x of debt for each dollar of equity against 1.20x. The gap matters most in a bad year.

1.20xKO0.02xMNSTborrowed vs owned
1.3xKO3.7xMNSTnear-term bills coverage
9xKO9238xMNSTearnings ÷ interest bill
$12.9BKO$3.4BMNSTcash plus short-term investments
Debt & cash

How much debt do KO and MNST carry, against the cash they hold?

→On the latest figures, KO's total debt is $43.5B, against $199M at MNST.

What this measures

Total borrowings against cash on hand, with debt as a multiple of shareholders' equity, and how many times profit covers the interest bill.

What good looks like. Interest covered comfortably - roughly eight times or more - and debt that is not a large multiple of equity.

If it rises or falls. Debt is only a problem when it has to be repaid or refinanced in a bad year, so cover matters more than the amount. Rising debt with rising cover is a business borrowing to grow; rising debt with falling cover is the combination that ends badly.

Near-term liquidity

Can KO and MNST cover the bills due within a year?

→On the latest figures, KO's current ratio is 1.3x, against 3.7x at MNST.

What this measures

Current assets over current liabilities: what the company can turn into cash within a year against what it owes within a year.

What good looks like. Comfortably above 1.0, and not falling year after year. Below 1.0 means near-term bills exceed near-term resources, which is normal for some business models and a warning in others.

If it rises or falls. Inventory and receivables build it up; short-term borrowing and payables pull it down. A retailer that turns stock over quickly can run lower than a manufacturer and be perfectly sound.

Cash conversion

Which turns more of its revenue into operating cash, KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's operating cash margin is 32.6%, against 24.3% at MNST.

What this measures

Operating cash flow as a share of revenue: of every dollar sold, how much reached the bank before capital spending.

What good looks like. A high share, holding up or improving. It is the clearest sign that reported profit is real.

If it rises or falls. It falls when customers take longer to pay or stock builds up, and it can stay high while profit falls - which is usually the more reassuring of the two.

Shareholders' equity

Is shareholders' equity growing faster at KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's shareholders' equity is $36.1B, against $9.4B at MNST.

What this measures

What would be left for shareholders if every asset were sold at its book value and every debt repaid. Book value, in other words.

What good looks like. Equity growing as retained profits build up, unless the company is deliberately returning more than it earns.

If it rises or falls. Equity falls for two very different reasons: buybacks, which return money to you, and losses, which do not. The distinction is the whole story, and negative equity means liabilities now exceed assets, which makes debt-to-equity and return on equity meaningless rather than alarming.

What does “Financial health” actually mean?

Financial health asks one question: could the business get through a bad year? It looks at how much each company has borrowed, how easily its profits cover the interest, and how much cash it holds against the bills due soon.

How each scored · KO 4/6 · MNST 5/6

Financial health, check by check

KOMNST
Comfortable near-term liquidityKOFails1.30 vs 1.50MNSTPasses3.73 vs 1.50
Debt isn't dominatingKOFails1.20 vs 1.00MNSTPasses0.02 vs 1.00
Debt trending the right wayKOPassesdebt/equity 1.20 now vs 1.72 five years agoMNSTFailsdebt/equity 0.02 now vs 0.00 five years ago
Earnings cover the interestKOPasses9.49 vs 5.00MNSTPasses9,238 vs 5.00
Converts sales to cash better than its sectorKOPasses32.6% vs 13.1% (sector 70th pct, n=55)MNSTPasses24.3% vs 13.1% (sector 70th pct, n=55)
Self-fundingKOPassesTTM free cash flow $14.3BMNSTPassesTTM free cash flow $2.1B
V

Shareholder returns: KO vs MNST

KO6/6MNST4/6

Coca-Cola pays a dividend yield of 2.3% at today's price and Monster Beverage pays almost nothing, the clearest difference in what each returns to shareholders.

+0.23%KO+0.24%MNSTbought back, last 12 months, over market value
+2.29%KO-MNSTat the current rate
$9.9BKO$221MMNSTdividends plus buybacks
$266MKO$136MMNSTlast 12 months, offsets buybacks
Capital returned

How much cash do KO and MNST hand back to shareholders?

→On the latest figures, KO's cash returned in dividends and buybacks is $9.5B, against $104M at MNST.

What this measures

Cash returned through buybacks and dividends, alongside the value of new shares issued to employees as compensation.

What good looks like. Returns comfortably larger than stock compensation, so the share count actually falls.

If it rises or falls. A company can announce billions in buybacks while issuing nearly as much stock to staff, and the two largely cancel. What reaches you is the net effect, which is why both bars are here rather than only the buyback.

Shareholder yield

Which pays shareholders the higher yield, KO or MNST, counting buybacks?

→On the latest figures, KO's shareholder yield is 3.3%, against 0.3% at MNST.

What this measures

Dividends and buybacks, each as a percentage of what the company was worth that year. The dollar chart says how much came back; this says how much came back for the price.

What good looks like. A total that clears a couple of percent and holds. Which half it comes from matters less than whether it is sustained.

If it rises or falls. A yield rises when the price falls as readily as when the payout grows, so read a jump beside the price chart before treating it as generosity.

Share count change

Is the share count falling faster at KO or MNST?

→On the latest figures, KO's change in share count is -0.0%, against 0.5% at MNST.

What this measures

The yearly change in the number of shares in issue, adjusted for splits so the years compare. A bar below zero is a falling share count, usually from buybacks; above zero, new shares were issued.

What good looks like. A flat or falling share count. Falling means each share you hold owns a little more of the business every year.

If it rises or falls. A rising count divides the same business among more owners, so your slice shrinks unless profits grow faster. This is the most direct chart on the page: it is your ownership, measured.

What does “Shareholder returns” actually mean?

Shareholder returns is the cash a company hands back to the people who own its shares, through dividends and by buying its own shares back, and whether the stock it issues to staff quietly undoes those buybacks.

How each scored · KO 6/6 · MNST 4/6

Shareholder returns, check by check

KOMNST
Share count isn't climbingKOPassesshares down 0.9% over 3 yearsMNSTPassesshares down 7.7% over 3 years
Buybacks outpace the stock issued to staffKOPasses$937M bought back vs $266M of stock compensationMNSTPasses$221M bought back vs $136M of stock compensation
What it hands back fits inside its cash flowKOPasses69.2% vs 100.0%MNSTPasses10.5% vs 100.0%
Meaningful yield to owners (dividends and buybacks)KOPasses$9.9B returned, 2.5% of market valueMNSTFails$221M returned, 0.2% of market value
Reliable payer, never cutKOPassespaid 10/10 years, worst year-on-year change 2.9%MNSTPasses$221M bought back in the last twelve months, $554M the year before; no dividend
Dividend per share growing ahead of inflationKOPasses16.3% vs 9.0%MNSTFails$221M vs $554M the year before; no dividend
VI

Trend: KO vs MNST

KO6/6MNST5/6
+14.7%KO+7.7%MNSTthe long-term trend line
+10.9%KO-3.1%MNSTshare price
+34.4%KO+32.5%MNSTshare price
-2.8%KO-7.6%MNSTdrawdown from the peak
Trend

Which way are KO and MNST shares trending?

KO
Price chart loads as you scroll…
MNST
Price chart loads as you scroll…

Charts by TradingView

→KO is in a clear uptrend: the price is above the cloud where recent trading settled, and that cloud is still rising underneath it. MNST is still in an uptrend, above the cloud where recent trading settled, but that cloud has started to slope down, so the support beneath is weakening.

How the trend is worked out

Trend reads the share price only: where it sits against its own long-term averages and how it has moved against the S&P 500. It says nothing about the business, which the other chapters cover.

How each scored · KO 6/6 · MNST 5/6

Trend, check by check

KOMNST
Price above its long-term trend bandKOPasses$92.71 against a top of the trend band of $88.45MNSTPasses$46.19 against a top of the trend band of $46.18
Price above its short and medium-term averagesKOPasses$92.71 against the 9-day average at $92.52 and the 26-day average at $90.25MNSTPasses$46.19 against the 9-day average at $45.41 and the 26-day average at $44.32
Short-term average above the medium-term oneKOPasses9-day average $92.52 above the 26-day average $90.25, 6 trading days since they crossedMNSTPasses9-day average $45.41 above the 26-day average $44.32, 8 trading days since they crossed
The long-term trend band ahead is risingKOPassesthe trend band already drawn for the next 26 trading days are rising and it turns up partway throughMNSTFailsthe trend band already drawn for the next 26 trading days are falling
Price above where it stood 26 trading days agoKOPasses$92.71 against $88.06 26 trading days agoMNSTPasses$46.19 against $44.51 26 trading days ago
Beating the S&P 500 over the last yearKOPasses34.4% vs 15.0%MNSTPasses32.5% vs 15.0%