Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) vs Constellation Brands, Inc. (STZ)
MNST leads on 8 of 15 compared metrics, though STZ is the cheaper stock.
A side-by-side comparison of Monster Beverage Corporation and Constellation Brands, Inc. across valuation, profitability, dividends, and growth — built entirely from reported fundamentals, as of June 13, 2026. The ● marks the stronger figure on each row (cheaper multiple, higher margin/return).
MNST
Monster Beverage Corporation
$92.83Consumer Defensive
STZ
Constellation Brands, Inc.
$148.51Consumer Defensive
Not enough overlapping price history to compare MNST and STZ.
MNST vs STZ: by the numbers
- •MNST is the larger company ($90.79B vs $25.47B market cap).
- •STZ trades at the lower earnings multiple (15.49 vs 44.85 P/E).
- •MNST converts more revenue to profit (23.11% vs 18.46% net margin).
- •MNST grew revenue faster over the past five years (12.96% vs 1.19% CAGR).
- •STZ pays a dividend (2.75% yield) while MNST does not currently pay one.
Which is better, MNST or STZ?
Metric tally: MNST 8 · STZ 7It depends on what you're optimizing for:
ValueSTZ(lower P/E)
GrowthMNST(faster 5Y revenue CAGR)
QualityMNST(higher ROIC)
Valuation
| Metric | MNST | STZ |
|---|---|---|
| P/E ratio | 44.85 | 15.49● |
| Forward P/E | 35.95 | 11.90● |
| P/S ratio | 10.43 | 2.82● |
| P/B ratio | 10.51 | 3.19● |
| PEG ratio | 1.31 | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 32.31 | 11.70● |
| FCF yield | 2.26% | 6.95%● |
Profitability
| Metric | MNST | STZ |
|---|---|---|
| Gross margin | 55.47%● | 51.67% |
| Operating margin | 29.34% | 31.33%● |
| Net margin | 23.11%● | 18.46% |
| ROE | 23.28%● | 20.87% |
| ROIC | 21.74%● | 10.48% |
Dividends
| Metric | MNST | STZ |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend yield | — | 2.75% |
| Payout ratio | — | 42.52% |
Growth (annualized)
| Metric | MNST | STZ |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue CAGR (5Y) | 12.96%● | 1.19% |
| EPS CAGR (5Y) | 7.95%● | -1.59% |
| FCF CAGR (5Y) | 10.53%● | -1.57% |
| Total return CAGR (5Y) | 14.70%● | -7.36% |
Frequently asked
- Which is better, MNST or STZ?
- It depends on your goal. value: STZ (lower P/E); growth: MNST (faster 5Y revenue CAGR); quality: MNST (higher ROIC). Across all compared metrics, MNST leads 8 to 7.
- Is MNST or STZ cheaper?
- On trailing earnings, STZ is cheaper: MNST trades at a 44.85 P/E and STZ at 15.49.
- Which has grown faster, MNST or STZ?
- Over the past five years, MNST grew revenue faster — MNST at a 12.96% CAGR versus STZ at 1.19%.
- Does MNST or STZ pay a bigger dividend?
- STZ pays a dividend (2.75% yield) while MNST does not currently pay one.
- Is MNST or STZ more profitable?
- MNST runs the higher net margin — MNST at 23.11% versus STZ at 18.46%.
- Which has been the better investment, MNST or STZ?
- Over the past 10-year, MNST delivered the higher annualized total return — MNST at 13.75% versus STZ at 1.25%. Past performance doesn't predict future results.
Go deeper
Dig into the metrics
Monster Beverage P/E ratioConstellation Brands P/E ratioMonster Beverage dividend yieldConstellation Brands dividend yieldMonster Beverage ROEConstellation Brands ROEMonster Beverage operating marginConstellation Brands operating marginMonster Beverage revenue growthConstellation Brands revenue growthMonster Beverage free cash flowConstellation Brands free cash flow
Monster Beverage & Constellation Brands appear in these rankings
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 June 13, 2026.