COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
HSY vs MNST
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HSY scored 65.9, MNST scored 63.4 — HSY leads.
Compare another set
HSY
The Hershey Company
65.9
$186.46 · $37.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
2.5
HSY 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
- CheapestHSY25.4x
- Fastest growthMNST+20.4%
- Strongest balance sheetMNST0.01
- Highest qualityMNST91 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueHSY-14%
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)
HSY
stronger →← stronger
MNST
82
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
76
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
90
46
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
31
MNST is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
HSY
MNST
$2.2bB
FCF
$2.1bB
+7.7%B
Rev
+20.4%A-
1.30C+
D/E
0.01A
25.4xC+
P/E
44.3xC
1.07B+
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
HSY
MNST
14% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
50% above
~6%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~18%/yr
-1%
1-yr DCF upside
-42%
+17%
5-yr DCF upside
-33%
+49%
10-yr DCF upside
-18%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
HSY
No notable signals flagged.
MNST
Why this score
- Durable high returns
The companies
HSYThe Hershey Company
Why now
Confectioners · market cap $37.5b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $239.48 — deep drawdown territory. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $205.81 (implying +10% upside).
Moat
Net margin 12% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 33% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 150% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
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.
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 HSY and MNST diverge
On the headline score the gap is 2.5 points in favor of HSY. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueHSY 46.1 · MNST 31.1HSY +15.0
- GrowthHSY 75.9 · MNST 90.2MNST +14.3
- QualityHSY 81.7 · MNST 90.7MNST +9.0
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.