COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
BRBR vs CELH
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BRBR scored 72.0, CELH scored 72.0 — tied at the top.
Compare another set
BRBR
BellRing Brands, Inc.
72
$10.45 · $1.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.0
Tied
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
- CheapestBRBR7.4x
- Fastest growthCELH+82.9%
- Highest qualityCELH64 / 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
CELH
62
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
64
62
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
100
99
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
59
CELH is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BRBR
CELH
$225mC
FCF
$463mC
+16.1%B+
Rev
+82.9%A
—
D/E
0.23A-
7.4xA
P/E
152.3xD
0.28A
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
BRBR
CELH
86% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
17% below
decline
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~8%/yr
+433%
1-yr DCF upside
-4%
+608%
5-yr DCF upside
+21%
+995%
10-yr DCF upside
+68%
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
CELH
No notable signals flagged.
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 +41% 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.
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
BRBR and CELH score effectively even on the Bull Rankings model (72.0 versus 72.0), so none holds a clear model edge — the call comes down to which trade-off you weight more: sector exposure (Packaged Foods versus Beverages - Non-Alcoholic) and valuation.
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 BRBR and CELH diverge
The two are effectively level on the headline score. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueBRBR 98.8 · CELH 58.5BRBR +40.3
- GrowthBRBR 62.1 · CELH 100.0CELH +37.9
- QualityBRBR 62.1 · 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.