vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Monster Beverage (MNST) and Altria (MO), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Altria is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($5.8B vs $2.1B, roughly 2.7× Monster Beverage). Monster Beverage runs the higher net margin — 21.1% vs 19.1%, a 2.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Monster Beverage posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (17.6% vs -2.1%). Altria produced more free cash flow last quarter ($3.2B vs $351.2M). Over the past eight quarters, Monster Beverage's revenue compounded faster (5.9% CAGR vs 2.4%).
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.
Altria Group, Inc., through its subsidiaries, manufactures and sells smokeable and oral tobacco products in the United States. The company provides cigarettes primarily under the Marlboro brand; cigars and pipe tobacco principally under the Black & Mild brand; and moist smokeless tobacco products under the Copenhagen, Skoal, Red Seal, and Husky brands, as well as provides on! oral nicotine pouches. It sells its tobacco products primarily to wholesalers, including distributors; and large retai...
MNST vs MO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.1B | $5.8B |
| Net Profit | $449.2M | $1.1B |
| Gross Margin | 55.5% | 62.1% |
| Operating Margin | 25.5% | 28.2% |
| Net Margin | 21.1% | 19.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 17.6% | -2.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 65.9% | -63.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $0.67 |
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 | $2.1B | $5.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | $6.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1B | $6.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.9B | $5.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.8B | $6.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9B | $6.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.9B | $6.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.9B | $5.6B |
| Q4 25 | $449.2M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.5M | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $488.8M | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $443.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $270.7M | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $370.9M | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $425.4M | $3.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $442.0M | $2.1B |
| Q4 25 | 55.5% | 62.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 55.7% | 62.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 55.7% | 63.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 56.5% | 61.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 55.3% | 60.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 53.2% | 60.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 53.6% | 59.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 54.1% | 58.8% |
| Q4 25 | 25.5% | 28.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 30.7% | 53.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 29.9% | 52.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 30.7% | 34.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.0% | 48.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 25.5% | 50.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 27.7% | 40.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 28.5% | 48.0% |
| Q4 25 | 21.1% | 19.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 23.9% | 39.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 23.1% | 39.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 23.9% | 20.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.9% | 50.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.7% | 36.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.4% | 61.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 23.3% | 38.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.67 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.41 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.41 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.63 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.78 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.34 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.21 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.21 |
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 | $2.8B | $4.5B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $25.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $8.3B | $-3.5B |
| Total Assets | $10.0B | $35.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $2.8B | $4.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.6B | $3.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.9B | $4.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.5B | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6B | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.6B | $3.6B |
| Q4 25 | — | $25.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $25.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $24.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $199.1M | $26.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $374.0M | $24.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $748.8M | $25.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $748.7M | $25.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $25.0B |
| Q4 25 | $8.3B | $-3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.7B | $-2.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.2B | $-3.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.5B | $-3.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.0B | $-2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.8B | $-3.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.9B | $-3.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $8.6B | $-5.1B |
| Q4 25 | $10.0B | $35.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.6B | $35.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.7B | $32.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $8.2B | $35.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.7B | $35.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.1B | $34.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $8.1B | $34.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.1B | $36.5B |
| 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 | $379.4M | $3.3B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $351.2M | $3.2B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 16.5% | 54.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 1.3% | 1.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 0.84× | 2.93× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $2.0B | $9.1B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $379.4M | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $745.1M | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $466.0M | $205.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $507.6M | $2.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $461.7M | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $618.4M | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $436.3M | $-75.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $412.1M | $2.9B |
| Q4 25 | $351.2M | $3.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $701.5M | $3.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $434.6M | $173.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $478.5M | $2.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $370.4M | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $571.4M | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $376.5M | $-104.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $346.1M | $2.8B |
| Q4 25 | 16.5% | 54.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 31.9% | 50.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.6% | 2.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 25.8% | 51.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 20.4% | 55.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 30.4% | 41.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.8% | -1.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 18.2% | 51.0% |
| Q4 25 | 1.3% | 1.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.0% | 0.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.5% | 0.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.6% | 0.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.0% | 0.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.5% | 0.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.1% | 0.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.5% | 0.6% |
| Q4 25 | 0.84× | 2.93× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.42× | 1.30× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.95× | 0.09× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.15× | 2.53× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.71× | 1.10× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.67× | 1.14× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.03× | -0.02× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.93× | 1.35× |
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
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% |
MO
| Smokeable Products Segment | $5.1B | 88% |
| Oral Tobacco Segment | $706.0M | 12% |
