Food and beverage · 21/36 against 21/36 checks · to 2026-09-08
MNST vs PEP.
Monster BeverageSells Monster energy drinks, distributed mostly by Coca-Cola bottlers.
PepsiCoSells Pepsi, Gatorade and the Frito-Lay and Quaker snack brands.→PepsiCo (PEP) is 4.5 times the size of Monster Beverage (MNST) at $189.0B against $42.3B, and they pass the same number of checks, 21 of 36.
Which passes more checks?
widest gap first→The two are furthest apart on Growth, where Monster Beverage passes 3 more of the six. They score identically on 4 of the six, so the difference between them is narrower than a headline suggests.
| MNST | PEP | |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5/6 | 2/6 |
| Shareholder returns | 3/6 | 6/6 |
| Value | 3/6 | 3/6 |
| Quality | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| Health | 3/6 | 3/6 |
| Trend analysis | 1/6 | 1/6 |
| All checks | 21/36 | 21/36 |
→PepsiCo turns over $96.9B to Monster Beverage's $9.2B, 10.5 times as much. Monster Beverage keeps 23.1% of revenue as profit against 10.8% at PepsiCo.
Which is growing faster, MNST or PEP?
| MNST | PEP | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue (TTM) | $9.2B | $96.9B |
| Revenue growth, 1 year | +20.4% | - |
| Revenue CAGR, 3 years | +9.5% | +2.8% |
| Net income (TTM) | $2.1B | $10.5B |
| Free cash flow (TTM) | $2.1B | $9.3B |
Which hands more back to owners?
→PepsiCo pays 4.0% at today's price and Monster Beverage effectively pays nothing, which is the clearest difference in what each hands back.
| MNST | PEP | |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend yield | - | 4.0% |
| Payout ratio | - | 73.1% |
| Years of unbroken dividend | - | - |
Which is cheaper?
→PepsiCo is the cheaper of the two on earnings, 18.2x against 20.0x. Against their own histories, Monster Beverage is above its 17.8x median and PepsiCo is below its 22.3x.
| MNST | PEP | |
|---|---|---|
| Share price | $43.15 | $138.45 |
| Market cap | $42.3B | $189.0B |
| P/E | 20.0x | 18.2x |
| P/E, own median own 11-year median / own 11-year median | 17.8x | 22.3x |
| P/S | 4.6x | 2.0x |
| Free cash flow yield | 5.0% | 4.9% |
Which keeps more of each sale?
→Their gross margins are within 1.6 points of each other, 55.5% at Monster Beverage and 54.0% at PepsiCo, so neither keeps materially more of a sale than the other.
| MNST | PEP | |
|---|---|---|
| Gross margin | 55.5% | 54.0% |
| Operating margin | 29.2% | 14.8% |
| Return on equity | 22.7% | 47.3% |
Which balance sheet is stronger?
| MNST | PEP | |
|---|---|---|
| Debt / equity | - | 2.00x |
| Interest coverage | - | 12.7x |
| Cash and short-term investments | $3.4B | $10.7B |
Where they differ most
the checks behind the gapGrowth: Monster Beverage 3 ahead
- Outgrew its sector last year 20.4% vs 3.6% (sector 70th pct, n=55)
- Sustained growth beats its sector (3 years) 9.5% vs 8.3% (sector 70th pct, n=52)
- Profits grew last year 35.2% vs 0.0%
- Sustained growth beats its sector (3 years) 2.8% vs 8.3% (sector 70th pct, n=52)
- Profit growth beats its peers -2.2% vs 30.1% (sector 70th pct, n=40)
Shareholder returns: PepsiCo 3 ahead
- Share count isn't climbing shares down 1.0% over 3 years
- Buybacks outpace the stock issued to staff $985M bought back vs $319M of stock compensation
- What it hands back fits inside its cash flow 94.7% vs 100.0%
- Meaningful yield to owners (dividends and buybacks) $221M returned, 0.5% of market value
- Buybacks are sustained, not one-off $221M bought back in the last twelve months, 0.00 the year before; no dividend
- Buybacks growing $221M vs 0.00 the year before; no dividend