Is COCO or BG the better stock?

COCO scores higher: COCO 66.4, BG 40.5 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 COCO and BG differ most?

The widest gap is quality, where COCO leads by 51 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. COCO leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.

How are COCO and BG 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.

COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026

BG vs COCO

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BG scored 40.5, COCO scored 66.4 — COCO leads.

Compare another set

Different reporting periods. COCO's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but BG's are as of March 2026 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.

Bunge Global SA

Farm Products · Quality-Growth

40.5

$110.16 · $21.2B

fundamentals as of Mar 2026

Score gap

25.9

COCO leads

COCO

The Vita Coco Company, Inc.

Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · Quality-Growth

66.4

$63.36 · $3.7B

fundamentals as of Jun 2026

At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules

Fastest growthCOCO+26.1%
Strongest balance sheetCOCO0.04
Highest qualityCOCO85 / 100

Side by side · every name on one set of axes

The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)

stronger →← stronger

COCO

Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet

Growthrevenue & earnings expansion

Valuevaluation vs sector peers

COCO is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.

Fundamentals, head-to-head

COCO

-$1.2bF

FCF

$124mC

+17.5%B+

Rev

+26.1%A-

0.98B

D/E

0.04A

1.2xB+

P/S

—

1.37B

PEG

2.29C

—

P/E

35.0xC

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

COCO

—

Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper

25% above

—

Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in

~15%/yr

—

1-yr DCF upside

-32%

—

5-yr DCF upside

-20%

—

10-yr DCF upside

+1%

The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.

Model signals

Why this score

Diluting shareholders

COCO

Why this score

Durable high returns

The companies

BGBunge Global SA

Farm Products · $110.16 · beta 0.65

Why now

Farm Products · market cap $21.2b. 18% off the 52-week high of $134.87. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $141.22 (implying +28% upside).

Moat

Higher-variance name — the moat signals on the quantitative card are modest, so the durability case rests on execution (turning current growth into durable earnings power) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than an entrenched competitive position.

Risk

Free cash flow is negative (-$1.2b) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Net margin 3.8% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 4% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.

COCOThe Vita Coco Company, Inc.

Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · $63.36 · beta 0.77

Why now

Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $3.7b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $85.83 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory. 9 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $83.89 (implying +32% upside).

Moat

Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 27% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 114% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.

Risk

Trailing P/E 35x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.

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 BG and COCO diverge

On the headline score the gap is 25.9 points in favor of COCO. The widest single difference is Quality, where COCO leads by 51.4 points.

QualityBG 33.3 · COCO 84.7COCO +51.4
GrowthBG 69.9 · COCO 93.0COCO +23.1
ValueBG 28.6 · COCO 37.2COCO +8.6

Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.