COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
COCO vs GIS
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. COCO scored 66.4, GIS scored 22.1 — COCO leads.
Compare another set
COCO
The Vita Coco Company, Inc.
66.4
$63.36 · $3.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
44.3
COCO leads
GIS
General Mills, Inc.
22.1
$40.92 · $21.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- Fastest growthCOCO+26.1%
- Strongest balance sheetCOCO0.04
- Highest qualityCOCO85 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueGIS-11%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
COCO
stronger →← stronger
GIS
85
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
46
93
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
14
37
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
17
COCO is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
COCO
GIS
$124mC
FCF
$1.6bC+
+26.1%A-
Rev
-5.4%D
0.04A
D/E
2.18C
35.0xC
P/E
—
2.29C
PEG
11.74D
—
P/S
1.2xB
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
GIS
25% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
11% below
~15%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~1%/yr
-32%
1-yr DCF upside
+11%
-20%
5-yr DCF upside
+13%
+1%
10-yr DCF upside
+15%
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
GIS
No notable signals flagged.
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.
GISGeneral Mills, Inc.
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $21.9b. Down 20% from 52-week high of $51.33 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue -5% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $37.56 (implying -8% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
D/E 2.18 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Revenue contracting -5% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Currently unprofitable (margin -0.5%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk.
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 GIS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 44.3 points in favor of COCO. The widest single difference is Growth, where COCO leads by 79.2 points.
- GrowthCOCO 93.0 · GIS 13.8COCO +79.2
- QualityCOCO 84.7 · GIS 45.7COCO +39.0
- ValueCOCO 37.2 · GIS 17.2COCO +20.0
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.