COST vs PEP: Which is Better to Buy in 2026?

Side-by-side fundamental comparison based on AI analysis of SEC filings

AI Verdict

COST has stronger fundamentals based on our AI analysis.

COST
COSTCO WHOLESALE CORP /NEW
BUY
81%
Confidence
VS
PEP
PEPSICO INC
BUY
77%
Confidence

COST vs PEP Fundamental Comparison

Metric COST PEP
Revenue $136.9B $93.9B
Net Income $4.0B $8.2B
Net Margin 2.9% 8.8%
ROE 12.6% 40.4%
ROA 4.8% 7.7%
Current Ratio 1.06x 0.85x
Debt/Equity 0.18x 2.27x
EPS $9.08 $6.00

Green = Better metric | Red = Weaker metric

View Full COST Analysis →
View Full PEP Analysis →
Browse Sectors: Technology Healthcare Finance Energy Consumer Industrial
Stock Lists: Strong Buy Undervalued Growth Dividend

You Might Also Compare

COST vs AAPL PEP vs MSFT COST vs GOOGL PEP vs AMZN

COST vs PEP: Frequently Asked Questions

Is COST or PEP a better buy in 2026?

Based on dual AI fundamental analysis (Claude and ChatGPT), COST has stronger fundamentals. COST is rated BUY (81% confidence) while PEP is rated BUY (77% confidence). This is not investment advice.

How does COST compare to PEP fundamentally?

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORP /NEW has ROE of 12.6% vs PEPSICO INC's 40.4%. Net margins are 2.9% vs 8.8% respectively.

Which stock pays higher dividends, COST or PEP?

COST has a dividend yield of N/A or no dividend while PEP has N/A or no dividend. Check individual stock pages for detailed dividend history and payout ratios.

Should I invest in COST or PEP for long term?

For long-term investing, consider that COST has BUY rating with 81% confidence, while PEP has BUY rating with 77% confidence. Higher confidence indicates more consistent fundamentals from SEC filings. This is not investment advice - always do your own research.

What do the AI models say about COST vs PEP?

Our dual AI system (Claude by Anthropic and ChatGPT by OpenAI) analyzes SEC 10-K and 10-Q filings independently. For COST vs PEP, the AI consensus favors COST based on fundamental metrics including revenue growth, profitability, ROE, and balance sheet strength.