COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
COCO vs MNST
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. COCO scored 65.3, MNST scored 63.4 — COCO leads.
Compare another set
COCO
The Vita Coco Company, Inc.
65.3
$63.35 · $3.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
1.9
COCO leads
MNST
Monster Beverage Corporation
63.4
$47.79 · $93.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestCOCO35.0x
- Fastest growthCOCO+26.1%
- Strongest balance sheetMNST0.01
- Highest qualityMNST91 / 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
MNST
85
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
93
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
90
35
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
31
COCO is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
COCO
MNST
$124mC
FCF
$2.1bB
+26.1%A-
Rev
+20.4%A-
0.04A
D/E
0.01A
35.0xC
P/E
44.3xC
2.36C
PEG
2.78C
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
MNST
25% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
50% above
~15%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~18%/yr
-32%
1-yr DCF upside
-42%
-20%
5-yr DCF upside
-33%
+1%
10-yr DCF upside
-18%
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
MNST
Why this score
- Durable high returns
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 28% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 112% 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.
MNSTMonster Beverage Corporation
Why now
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $93.6b. 5% 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 $50.13 (implying +5% 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% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — 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, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 44x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 10.2x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
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 MNST diverge
On the headline score the gap is 1.9 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 · MNST 90.7MNST +6.0
- ValueCOCO 35.4 · MNST 31.1COCO +4.3
- GrowthCOCO 93.0 · MNST 90.2level
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.