Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BG scored 51.0, PEP scored 65.5 — PEP leads.
Compare another set
BG
Bunge Global SA
Farm Products · Quality-Growth
51
$102.73 · $19.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.5
PEP leads
PEP
PepsiCo, Inc.
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · Quality-Growth
65.5
$125.97 · $171.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthBG+32.4%
Strongest balance sheetBG0.98
Highest qualityPEP78 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
BG
stronger →← stronger
PEP
38
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
78
81
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
56
44
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
64
PEP is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BG
PEP
-$711mF
FCF
$10.5bA-
+32.4%A
Rev
+6.4%C+
0.98B
D/E
2.31C
0.2xA
P/S
—
1.37B
PEG
1.31B
—
P/E
16.5xB+
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
BG
PEP
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
5% above
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~6%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
-8%
—
5-yr DCF upside
-5%
—
10-yr DCF upside
-1%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
BG
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
PEP
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
BGBunge Global SA
Farm Products · $102.73 · beta 0.72
Why now
Farm Products · market cap $19.7b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $134.87 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +32% — in hypergrowth territory. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $141.78 (implying +38% 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 (-$711m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Net margin 1.1% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 7% 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.
PEPPepsiCo, Inc.
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · $125.97
Why now
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $171.7b. Down 27% from 52-week high of $171.48 — deep drawdown territory. 22 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $143.86 (implying +14% upside).
Moat
ROE 49% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 96% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $171.7b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
D/E 2.31 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Dividend payout 75% of earnings on a 4.6% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
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 PEP diverge
On the headline score the gap is 14.5 points in favor of PEP. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityBG 37.6 · PEP 78.2PEP +40.6
GrowthBG 80.9 · PEP 56.1BG +24.8
ValueBG 43.7 · PEP 64.1PEP +20.4
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 PEP or BG the better stock?
PEP scores higher: PEP 65.5, BG 51.0 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 PEP and BG differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where PEP leads by 41 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 PEP 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.