Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: MNST stock price vs LVS: inconclusive Relative valuation is incomplete for this pair. Review the available filing metrics before drawing a conclusion.
Quick read
Each company valued on the other's multiple, then compared with the market price.
Implied fair value · at LVS's multiple
Needs Annual EPS, LVS P/E.
Implied fair value · at MNST's multiple
Needs MNST P/E.
Price unavailable
Metric by metric
Where each company leads, and how wide the gap is.
Growth lag
Reported gross margin
Operating income + D&A
Lower is better
Not comparable
Lower leverage
Statements
Annual statements in reported currencies, with calculations and source evidence.
Values retain reported currencies and share bases. Select a figure to inspect its period, calculation and filing inputs. Differences require compatible units and periods.
Explore enterprise value and market valuation multiples in the valuation sections.
Trendline
11 period-end years of reported revenue, earnings, and margins. Periods and currencies are shown with the data.
Price framework
USD market cap plus reported borrowing debt, less cash and equivalents. This EV proxy excludes investments, preferred stock and noncontrolling-interest adjustments.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Price framework
The same filing-backed model used on each company's valuation page, with company-specific inputs and calculated scenarios.
Monster Beverage Corp · implied price per share
Debt and bridge-cash inputs are required to translate enterprise value into equity value.
LAS VEGAS SANDS CORP. · implied price per share
Debt and bridge-cash inputs are required to translate enterprise value into equity value.
Balance sheet health
Inspect reported liquidity and leverage alongside historical financial-health checks.
Financial strength on a 0–9 scale.
Bankruptcy-risk signal from balance sheet and earnings power.
Not enough data to score either balance sheet.
Cash excludes investments. EBITDA is an operating-income-plus-D&A proxy. Missing borrowing categories remain unavailable; select a value to inspect its inputs.
Comparable set
Where the pair sits against the wider comparable set.
Keep comparing
Open adjacent comparisons from the same industry to pressure-test the read across multiple pairs.
COCA COLA CO
MNST vs KO
PEPSICO INC
MNST vs PEP
Keurig Dr Pepper Inc.
MNST vs KDP
NATIONAL BEVERAGE CORP
MNST vs FIZZ
MOLSON COORS BEVERAGE CO
MNST vs TAP
BROWN FORMAN CORP
MNST vs BF-A
MGM Resorts International
MNST vs MGM
WYNN RESORTS LTD
MNST vs WYNN
Caesars Entertainment, Inc.
MNST vs CZR
PENN Entertainment, Inc.
MNST vs PENN
LLM-powered synthesis
An explanation of the financial evidence. Check its snapshot date against the figures above.
This explanation uses an earlier data snapshot or evidence version. Review its generation date and the current figures, or refresh after signing in.
If you believe MNST can sustain its premium multiples despite slower revenue growth, then hold off on adding exposure or consider trimming because the current price embeds a valuation far above both LVS-implied and DCF ranges.
MNST trades at a large premium on both earnings and sales multiples versus LVS, yet the implied price from the provided P/E comparison is 51.0% below the current price. The stock is also well above LVS-implied and DCF ranges, suggesting the market is paying for quality that is not supported by the relative valuation outputs.
Supporting Metrics
