COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
CCU vs CELH
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CCU scored 58.7, CELH scored 72.0 — CELH leads.
Compare another set
CCU
Compañía Cervecerías Unidas S.A.
58.7
$12.66 · $2.3B
Score gap
13.3
CELH leads
CELH
Celsius Holdings, Inc.
72
$35.03 · $8.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestCCU20.8x
- Fastest growthCELH+82.9%
- Strongest balance sheetCELH0.23
- Highest qualityCCU66 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueCCU-23%
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)
CCU
stronger →← stronger
CELH
66
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
64
84
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
100
50
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
59
CELH is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CCU
CELH
$150mC
FCF
$463mC
+13.2%B+
Rev
+82.9%A
0.82B
D/E
0.23A-
20.8xB
P/E
152.3xD
1.73C+
PEG
0.36A
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
CCU
CELH
23% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
17% below
~5%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~8%/yr
+7%
1-yr DCF upside
-4%
+30%
5-yr DCF upside
+21%
+70%
10-yr DCF upside
+68%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CCU
Why this score
- Durable high returns
- Cut its dividend
- Foreign reporter (CLP)
CELH
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
CCUCompañía Cervecerías Unidas S.A.
Why now
Beverages - Brewers · market cap $2.3b. 18% off the 52-week high of $15.36. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $11.64 (implying -8% upside).
Moat
ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
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.
Why now
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $8.9b. Down 48% from 52-week high of $66.74 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +83% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.36 — 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 +17% 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 152.3x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 48% 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
CELH leads CCU by 13.3 points (72.0 to 58.7), its sharpest advantage coming in PEG (grade A). A contrarian could still prefer CCU, which trades about 23% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. All screen as growth-type names but sit in different sectors (Beverages - Brewers versus Beverages - Non-Alcoholic), so their grades are relative to different peer sets.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 CCU and CELH diverge
On the headline score the gap is 13.3 points in favor of CELH. The widest single difference is Growth, where CELH leads by 15.8 points.
- GrowthCCU 84.2 · CELH 100.0CELH +15.8
- ValueCCU 50.3 · CELH 58.5CELH +8.2
- QualityCCU 65.6 · CELH 63.6level
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.