vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Keurig Dr Pepper (KDP) and Monster Beverage (MNST), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Keurig Dr Pepper is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.5B vs $2.1B, roughly 2.1× Monster Beverage). Monster Beverage runs the higher net margin — 7.8% vs 21.1%, a 13.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Monster Beverage posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (17.6% vs 10.5%). Keurig Dr Pepper produced more free cash flow last quarter ($564.0M vs $351.2M). Over the past eight quarters, Keurig Dr Pepper's revenue compounded faster (13.9% CAGR vs 5.9%).
Keurig Dr Pepper Inc. is a publicly traded American beverage and coffeemaker conglomerate with headquarters located in Burlington, Massachusetts, and Frisco, Texas. Formed in July 2018, with the merger of Keurig Green Mountain and Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Keurig Dr Pepper produces and distributes more than 125 hot and cold beverages. The company's Canadian business unit subsidiary operates as Keurig Dr Pepper Canada.
Monster Beverage Corporation is an American beverage company that manufactures energy drinks including Monster Energy, Relentless, Reign and Burn. The company was originally founded as Hansen's in 1935 in Southern California, originally selling juice products. The company renamed itself as Monster Beverage in 2012.
KDP vs MNST — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.5B | $2.1B |
| Net Profit | $353.0M | $449.2M |
| Gross Margin | 53.8% | 55.5% |
| Operating Margin | 19.6% | 25.5% |
| Net Margin | 7.8% | 21.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 10.5% | 17.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | 345.1% | 65.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.26 | — |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $4.5B | $2.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.3B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2B | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.6B | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.1B | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.9B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.9B | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.5B | $1.9B |
| Q4 25 | $353.0M | $449.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $662.0M | $524.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $547.0M | $488.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $517.0M | $443.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-144.0M | $270.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $616.0M | $370.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $515.0M | $425.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $454.0M | $442.0M |
| Q4 25 | 53.8% | 55.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 54.3% | 55.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 54.2% | 55.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 54.6% | 56.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 55.9% | 55.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 55.0% | 53.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 55.4% | 53.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 55.9% | 54.1% |
| Q4 25 | 19.6% | 25.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 23.1% | 30.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 21.6% | 29.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 22.0% | 30.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.5% | 21.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.2% | 25.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.0% | 27.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 22.1% | 28.5% |
| Q4 25 | 7.8% | 21.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.4% | 23.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.1% | 23.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 14.2% | 23.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.5% | 14.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.8% | 19.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.1% | 22.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.1% | 23.3% |
| Q4 25 | $0.26 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.49 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.40 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.38 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.11 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.45 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.38 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.33 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.0B | $2.8B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $25.5B | $8.3B |
| Total Assets | $55.5B | $10.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $516.0M | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $509.0M | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $653.0M | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $510.0M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $552.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $438.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $317.0M | $3.6B |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $199.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $374.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $748.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $748.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $25.5B | $8.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $25.3B | $7.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $25.0B | $7.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $24.4B | $6.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $24.2B | $6.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $25.0B | $5.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $24.7B | $5.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $24.7B | $8.6B |
| Q4 25 | $55.5B | $10.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $54.6B | $9.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $54.4B | $8.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $53.7B | $8.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $53.4B | $7.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $52.7B | $8.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $52.3B | $8.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $52.3B | $10.1B |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.03× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.06× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.13× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.13× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $712.0M | $379.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $564.0M | $351.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 12.5% | 16.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 3.3% | 1.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 2.02× | 0.84× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.5B | $2.0B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $712.0M | $379.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $639.0M | $745.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $431.0M | $466.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $209.0M | $507.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $849.0M | $461.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $628.0M | $618.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $657.0M | $436.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $85.0M | $412.1M |
| Q4 25 | $564.0M | $351.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $527.0M | $701.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $325.0M | $434.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $89.0M | $478.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $684.0M | $370.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $503.0M | $571.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $542.0M | $376.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-73.0M | $346.1M |
| Q4 25 | 12.5% | 16.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 12.2% | 31.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.8% | 20.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.4% | 25.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.8% | 20.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.9% | 30.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.8% | 19.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.1% | 18.2% |
| Q4 25 | 3.3% | 1.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.6% | 2.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.5% | 1.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.3% | 1.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.1% | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.9% | 3.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.6% | 3.5% |
| Q4 25 | 2.02× | 0.84× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.97× | 1.42× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.79× | 0.95× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.40× | 1.15× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.71× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.02× | 1.67× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.28× | 1.03× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.19× | 0.93× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
KDP
| LRB | $2.6B | 59% |
| K Cup Pods | $941.0M | 21% |
| Other | $660.0M | 15% |
| Appliances | $177.0M | 4% |
| Other Net Sales | $81.0M | 2% |
MNST
| Monster Energy Drinks Segment | $1.2B | 57% |
| Sales Revenue Product Line | $905.5M | 42% |
| Strategic Brands Segment | $50.3M | 2% |
| Alcohol Brands Segment | $29.0M | 1% |
