COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026

BRBR vs MKC

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BRBR scored 72.0, MKC scored 57.1 — BRBR leads.
Compare another set
BRBR
BellRing Brands, Inc.
Packaged Foods · Quality-Growth
72
$10.19 · $1.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.9
BRBR leads
MKC
McCormick & Company, Incorporated
Packaged Foods · Quality-Growth
57.1
$55.41 · $14.9B
fundamentals as of
  • CheapestBRBR7.2x
  • Fastest growthBRBR+16.1%
  • Highest qualityMKC74 / 100
  • Largest discount to fair valueBRBR-86%
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD72.0/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY62.1GROWTH62.1VALUE98.4
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD57.1/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY73.6GROWTH43.4VALUE58.4
BRBRMKCQuality62.173.6Growth62.143.4Value98.458.4
cheap & fastrevenue growth →← cheaper (lower multiple)0%26%2.2x14xBRBRMKC

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.

FCFBRBR$225mMKC$970m
RevBRBR+16.1%MKC+9.5%
P/EBRBR7.2xMKC9.2x
PEGBRBR0.28MKC2.19
BRBR
stronger →← stronger
MKC
62
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
74
62
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
43
98
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
58
BRBR is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
BRBR
MKC
$225mC
FCF
$970mC+
+16.1%B+
Rev
+9.5%B
D/E
0.65B+
7.2xA
P/E
9.2xA
0.28A
PEG
2.19C
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.
BRBR
MKC
86% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
32% below
decline
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-4%/yr
+446%
1-yr DCF upside
+40%
+626%
5-yr DCF upside
+48%
+1023%
10-yr DCF upside
+59%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
BRBR
Why this score
  • Buying back stock
  • Short track record
MKC
Why this score
  • Raising its dividend
BRBRBellRing Brands, Inc.
Packaged Foods · $10.19 · beta 0.52
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 +44% 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.
MKCMcCormick & Company, Incorporated
Packaged Foods · $55.41 · beta 0.63
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $14.9b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $72.41 — deep drawdown territory. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $60.62 (implying +9% upside).
Moat
Net margin 22% 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.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
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 BRBR and MKC diverge

On the headline score the gap is 14.9 points in favor of BRBR. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.

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.