Which has the lower trailing P/E, BG or STZ?

STZ has the lower trailing P/E: BG trades at 22.44 and STZ at 11.35. P/E is one valuation measure and does not by itself establish which business is cheaper.

Which has grown faster, BG or STZ?

Over the past five years, BG grew revenue faster — BG at a 12.43% CAGR versus STZ at 0.86%.

Does BG or STZ pay a bigger dividend?

BG yields 2.32% and STZ yields 3.35% based on trailing dividends and the latest price.

Is BG or STZ more profitable?

STZ runs the higher net margin — BG at 1.10% versus STZ at 20.14%.

How have BG and STZ total returns compared?

Over the past 10 years, BG delivered 10.23% and STZ delivered -1.19% annualized total return. Past performance doesn't predict future results.

Bunge Global S.A. (BG) vs Constellation Brands, Inc. (STZ)

A side-by-side comparison of Bunge Global S.A. and Constellation Brands, Inc. across valuation, profitability, dividends, and growth — built entirely from reported fundamentals, as of September 13, 2026. Differences are shown without an overall score or investment verdict.

Bunge Global S.A.

$22.21B

$115.58Consumer DefensiveDelayed quote: Sep 18, 2026, 4:00 PM EDT

STZ

Constellation Brands, Inc.

$20.32B

$118.97Consumer DefensiveDelayed quote: Sep 18, 2026, 4:00 PM EDT

Total return — BG vs STZ

growth of $100 · dividends reinvested · last 10y

BG +169.1% (+10.4%/yr)STZ -13.7% (-1.5%/yr)BG compounded faster over this window

BG STZ

BG vs STZ: by the numbers

•BG is the larger company ($22.21B vs $20.32B market cap).
•STZ trades at the lower trailing earnings multiple (11.35 vs 22.44 P/E), one valuation lens rather than an overall verdict.
•STZ converts more revenue to profit (20.14% vs 1.10% net margin).
•BG grew revenue faster over the past five years (12.43% vs 0.86% CAGR).
•STZ pays the higher dividend yield (3.35% vs 2.32%).

Metrics side by side

Valuation

Metric	BG	STZ
P/E ratio	22.44	11.35
Forward P/E	12.14	10.08
P/S ratio	0.24	2.24
P/B ratio	1.39	2.46
EV / EBITDA	12.61	9.26
FCF yield	N/A	9.03%

Profitability

Metric	BG	STZ
Gross margin	4.94%	52.62%
Operating margin	2.27%	32.14%
Net margin	1.10%	20.14%
ROE	6.33%	22.10%
ROIC	5.82%	10.85%

Dividends

Metric	BG	STZ
Dividend yield	2.32%	3.35%
Payout ratio	55.15%	39.12%

Growth (annualized)

Metric	BG	STZ
Revenue CAGR (5Y)	12.43%	0.86%
EPS CAGR (5Y)	-9.16%	-1.59%
FCF CAGR (5Y)	26.09%	-1.73%
Total return CAGR (5Y)	12.94%	-8.87%

Frequently asked

Which has the lower trailing P/E, BG or STZ?: STZ has the lower trailing P/E: BG trades at 22.44 and STZ at 11.35. P/E is one valuation measure and does not by itself establish which business is cheaper.
Which has grown faster, BG or STZ?: Over the past five years, BG grew revenue faster — BG at a 12.43% CAGR versus STZ at 0.86%.
Does BG or STZ pay a bigger dividend?: BG yields 2.32% and STZ yields 3.35% based on trailing dividends and the latest price.
Is BG or STZ more profitable?: STZ runs the higher net margin — BG at 1.10% versus STZ at 20.14%.
How have BG and STZ total returns compared?: Over the past 10 years, BG delivered 10.23% and STZ delivered -1.19% annualized total return. Past performance doesn't predict future results.

Go deeper

Full BG analysis Full STZ analysis Interactive comparison tool

Dig into the metrics

Bunge Global P/E ratio Constellation Brands P/E ratio Bunge Global dividend yield Constellation Brands dividend yield Bunge Global ROE Constellation Brands ROE Bunge Global operating margin Constellation Brands operating margin Bunge Global revenue growth Constellation Brands revenue growth Bunge Global free cash flow Constellation Brands free cash flow

Bunge Global & Constellation Brands appear in these rankings

Highest Dividend Yield Stocks Highest Operating Margin Stocks Highest FCF Yield Stocks Lowest P/E Ratio Stocks

Figures are sourced from reported fundamentals and the latest end-of-day price. This comparison is informational only and is not investment advice. Past performance does not predict future results. See our methodology. Compiled by TGMCharts Research · data verified September 13, 2026.