COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
CCEP vs CELH
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CCEP scored 38.7, CELH scored 72.5 — CELH leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. CELH's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but CCEP's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
CCEP
Coca-Cola Europacific Partners PLC
38.7
$108.00 · $47.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
33.8
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
- CheapestCCEP20.8x
- Fastest growthCELH+82.9%
- Strongest balance sheetCELH0.23
- Highest qualityCCEP72 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueCELH-21%
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)
CCEP
stronger →← stronger
CELH
72
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
64
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
100
19
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
60
CELH is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CCEP
CELH
—
FCF
$463mC
+2.3%C
Rev
+82.9%A
1.39C+
D/E
0.23A-
20.8xB
P/E
145.0xD
3.11D
PEG
0.35A
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
CCEP
CELH
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
21% below
—
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~7%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
+1%
—
5-yr DCF upside
+27%
—
10-yr DCF upside
+77%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CCEP
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
- Foreign reporter (EUR)
CELH
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
CCEPCoca-Cola Europacific Partners PLC
Why now
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $47.7b. 5% off the 52-week high of $113.67. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $113.65 (implying +5% upside).
Moat
ROE 24% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
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 CCEP and CELH diverge
On the headline score the gap is 33.8 points in favor of CELH. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- GrowthCCEP 49.5 · CELH 100.0CELH +50.5
- ValueCCEP 19.0 · CELH 59.5CELH +40.5
- QualityCCEP 72.0 · CELH 64.0CCEP +8.0
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.