At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestBF-B17.0x
Fastest growthCELH+85.5%
Strongest balance sheetCELH0.23
Highest qualityBF-B81 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueCELH-33%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
BF-B
stronger →← stronger
CELH
81
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
61
31
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
95
70
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
52
BF-B is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BF-B
CELH
$925mC+
FCF
$463mC
-0.8%D+
Rev
+85.5%A
0.62B+
D/E
0.23A-
17.0xB+
P/E
124.3xD
2.02C
PEG
0.25A
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
BF-B
CELH
6% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
33% below
~1%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~5%/yr
+10%
1-yr DCF upside
+14%
+7%
5-yr DCF upside
+48%
+2%
10-yr DCF upside
+118%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Beverages - Wineries & Distilleries · market cap $12.1b. 17% off the 52-week high of $31.92. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $28.26 (implying +7% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 18% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 128% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
CELHCelsius Holdings, Inc.
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · $28.58 · beta 1.00
Why now
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $7.2b. Down 57% from 52-week high of $66.74 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +86% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.25 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $42.19 (implying +48% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of cash released from working capital ($295m) — a release that doesn't repeat every year the way earnings can.
Risk
Trailing P/E 124.3x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 57% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 4.2% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where BF-B and CELH diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.1 points in favor of CELH. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthBF-B 30.9 · CELH 94.9CELH +64.0
QualityBF-B 81.1 · CELH 60.9BF-B +20.2
ValueBF-B 69.6 · CELH 52.0BF-B +17.6
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is CELH or BF-B the better stock?
CELH scores higher: CELH 67.0, BF-B 55.9 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do CELH and BF-B differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where CELH leads by 64 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are CELH and BF-B scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.