Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CAG scored 24.9, MNST scored 62.5 — MNST leads.
Compare another set
CAG
Conagra Brands, Inc.
Packaged Foods · Quality-Growth
24.9
$13.49 · $6.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
37.6
MNST leads
MNST
Monster Beverage Corporation
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · Quality-Growth
62.5
$43.64 · $85.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthMNST+20.4%
Strongest balance sheetMNST0.01
Highest qualityMNST90 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueCAG-48%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
CAG
stronger →← stronger
MNST
38
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
90
14
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
88
29
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
31
MNST is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CAG
MNST
$979mC+
FCF
$2.1bB
-2.9%D+
Rev
+20.4%A-
1.21C+
D/E
0.01A
0.6xA-
P/S
—
10.86D
PEG
2.24C
—
P/E
40.4xC
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
MNST
48% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
123% above
~-15%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~30%/yr
+111%
1-yr DCF upside
-60%
+93%
5-yr DCF upside
-55%
+71%
10-yr DCF upside
-47%
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
MNST
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
CAGConagra Brands, Inc.
Packaged Foods · $13.49 · beta 0.00
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $6.4b. Down 34% from 52-week high of $20.32 — deep drawdown territory. 16 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $14.32 (implying +6% 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. Down 34% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Dividend payout 80% of earnings on a 5.2% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
MNSTMonster Beverage Corporation
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · $43.64 · beta 0.49
Why now
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $85.5b. 13% off the 52-week high of $50.17. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $50.02 (implying +15% upside).
Moat
Net margin 23% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 23% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 99% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Trailing P/E 40x 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 CAG and MNST diverge
On the headline score the gap is 37.6 points in favor of MNST. The widest single difference is Growth, where MNST leads by 73.6 points.
GrowthCAG 14.1 · MNST 87.7MNST +73.6
QualityCAG 38.1 · MNST 90.4MNST +52.3
ValueCAG 28.6 · MNST 30.8level
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 MNST or CAG the better stock?
MNST scores higher: MNST 62.5, CAG 24.9 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 MNST and CAG differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where MNST leads by 74 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. MNST also leads quality, while value is effectively level between them.
How are MNST and CAG 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.