COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
COCO vs MDLZ
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. COCO scored 66.4, MDLZ scored 57.7 — COCO leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. COCO's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but MDLZ's are as of March 2026 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
COCO
The Vita Coco Company, Inc.
66.4
$63.36 · $3.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
8.7
COCO leads
MDLZ
Mondelez International, Inc.
57.7
$64.70 · $82.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestMDLZ23.6x
- Fastest growthCOCO+26.1%
- Strongest balance sheetCOCO0.04
- Highest qualityCOCO85 / 100
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)
COCO
stronger →← stronger
MDLZ
85
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
58
93
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
76
37
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
44
COCO is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
COCO
MDLZ
$124mC
FCF
$2.6bB
+26.1%A-
Rev
+7.8%B
0.04A
D/E
0.83B
35.0xC
P/E
23.6xB
2.29C
PEG
1.07B+
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
COCO
MDLZ
25% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
85% above
~15%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~23%/yr
-32%
1-yr DCF upside
-51%
-20%
5-yr DCF upside
-46%
+1%
10-yr DCF upside
-38%
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
COCO
Why this score
- Durable high returns
MDLZ
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
The companies
COCOThe Vita Coco Company, Inc.
Why now
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $3.7b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $85.83 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory. 9 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $83.89 (implying +32% upside).
Moat
Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 27% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 114% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 35x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
MDLZMondelez International, Inc.
Why now
Confectioners · market cap $82.6b. Trading near 52-week high of $66.65 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $69.13 (implying +7% upside).
Moat
ROE 10% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 99% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. $82.6b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Trading within 3% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction.
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 COCO and MDLZ diverge
On the headline score the gap is 8.7 points in favor of COCO. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityCOCO 84.7 · MDLZ 57.7COCO +27.0
- GrowthCOCO 93.0 · MDLZ 75.6COCO +17.4
- ValueCOCO 37.2 · MDLZ 43.9MDLZ +6.7
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.