COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
CAG vs CELH
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CAG scored 23.7, CELH scored 72.5 — CELH leads.
Compare another set
CAG
Conagra Brands, Inc.
23.7
$16.67 · $8.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
48.8
CELH leads
CELH
Celsius Holdings, Inc. Common Stock
72.5
$33.36 · $8.4B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- Fastest growthCELH+82.9%
- Strongest balance sheetCELH0.23
- Highest qualityCELH64 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueCAG-50%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
CAG
stronger →← stronger
CELH
37
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
64
14
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
100
25
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
60
CELH is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CAG
CELH
$979mC+
FCF
$463mC
-2.9%D+
Rev
+82.9%A
1.18C+
D/E
0.23A-
0.7xA-
P/S
—
10.86D
PEG
0.35A
—
P/E
145.0xD
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
CAG
CELH
50% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
21% below
~-11%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~7%/yr
+88%
1-yr DCF upside
+1%
+99%
5-yr DCF upside
+27%
+115%
10-yr DCF upside
+77%
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.
Model signals
CAG
Why this score
- Cut its dividend
CELH
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
CAGConagra Brands, Inc.
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $8.0b. 18% off the 52-week high of $20.32. 16 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $14.38 (implying -14% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Currently unprofitable (margin -17.0%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Dividend payout 79% of earnings on a 7.5% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut. ROE -30% 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.
CELHCelsius Holdings, Inc. Common Stock
Why now
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $8.4b. Down 50% from 52-week high of $66.74 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +83% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.35 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $40.95 (implying +23% upside).
Moat
ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 145.0x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 50% 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 CAG and CELH diverge
On the headline score the gap is 48.8 points in favor of CELH. The widest single difference is Growth, where CELH leads by 85.9 points.
- GrowthCAG 14.1 · CELH 100.0CELH +85.9
- ValueCAG 25.4 · CELH 59.5CELH +34.1
- QualityCAG 37.0 · CELH 64.0CELH +27.0
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.