COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
CELH vs STZ
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CELH scored 72.5, STZ scored 58.9 — CELH leads.
Compare another set
CELH
Celsius Holdings, Inc. Common Stock
72.5
$33.36 · $8.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
13.6
CELH leads
STZ
Constellation Brands, Inc.
58.9
$135.66 · $23.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestSTZ12.9x
- Fastest growthCELH+82.9%
- Strongest balance sheetCELH0.23
- Highest qualitySTZ74 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueCELH-21%
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)
CELH
stronger →← stronger
STZ
64
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
74
100
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
42
60
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
66
STZ is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CELH
STZ
$463mC
FCF
$1.8bC+
+82.9%A
Rev
-10.0%D
0.23A-
D/E
1.23C+
145.0xD
P/E
12.9xA-
0.35A
PEG
1.67C+
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
CELH
STZ
21% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
18% below
~7%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-1%/yr
+1%
1-yr DCF upside
+19%
+27%
5-yr DCF upside
+22%
+77%
10-yr DCF upside
+27%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
The companies
CELHCelsius Holdings, Inc. Common Stock
Why now
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic · market cap $8.4b. Down 50% from 52-week high of $66.74 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +83% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.35 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $40.95 (implying +23% upside).
Moat
ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 145.0x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 50% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 4.2% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
STZConstellation Brands, Inc.
Why now
Beverages - Brewers · market cap $23.2b. 20% off the 52-week high of $168.60. Revenue -10% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating. 23 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $170.83 (implying +26% upside).
Moat
Net margin 20% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 22% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 101% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Revenue contracting -10% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line.
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 CELH and STZ diverge
On the headline score the gap is 13.6 points in favor of CELH. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- GrowthCELH 100.0 · STZ 42.0CELH +58.0
- QualityCELH 64.0 · STZ 73.6STZ +9.6
- ValueCELH 59.5 · STZ 66.0STZ +6.5
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.