COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
BRBR vs FMX
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BRBR scored 72.0, FMX scored 24.4 — BRBR leads.
Compare another set
BRBR
BellRing Brands, Inc.
72
$10.19 · $1.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
47.6
BRBR leads
FMX
Fomento Económico Mexicano, S.A.B. de C.V.
24.4
$120.68 · $41.1B
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestBRBR7.2x
- Fastest growthBRBR+16.1%
- Highest qualityBRBR62 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueBRBR-86%
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)
BRBR
stronger →← stronger
FMX
62
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
62
62
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
64
98
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
5
BRBR and FMX split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BRBR
FMX
$225mC
FCF
—
+16.1%B+
Rev
+11.2%B
—
D/E
0.84B
7.2xA
P/E
23.4xB
0.28A
PEG
4.72D
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
BRBR
FMX
86% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
—
decline
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
—
+446%
1-yr DCF upside
—
+626%
5-yr DCF upside
—
+1023%
10-yr DCF upside
—
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
BRBR
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Short track record
FMX
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Foreign reporter (MXN)
The companies
BRBRBellRing Brands, Inc.
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $1.2b. Down 76% from 52-week high of $43.02 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.28 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $14.71 (implying +44% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 131% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 76% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. ROE -37% 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.
FMXFomento Económico Mexicano, S.A.B. de C.V.
Why now
Beverages - Brewers · market cap $41.1b. 15% off the 52-week high of $141.47. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $134.54 (implying +11% upside).
Moat
ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
Risk
Dividend payout 139% of earnings on a 5.0% 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 BRBR and FMX diverge
On the headline score the gap is 47.6 points in favor of BRBR. The widest single difference is Value, where BRBR leads by 93.3 points.
- ValueBRBR 98.4 · FMX 5.1BRBR +93.3
- GrowthBRBR 62.1 · FMX 63.8level
- QualityBRBR 62.1 · FMX 61.9level
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.