VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Wednesday, December 31, 2025

Stock Comparison

Monster Beverage Corporation vs Philip Morris International Inc.

Compare moat strength, market structure, and segment coverage to understand how each company defends its edge.

Monster Beverage Corporation

MNST · Nasdaq Global Select Market

Market cap (USD)$65.7B
SectorConsumer
CountryUS
Data as of2025-12-31
Moat score
76/ 100

Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.

Full stock profile

Dive deeper into Monster Beverage Corporation's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View MNST analysis

Philip Morris International Inc.

PM · New York Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
SectorConsumer
CountryUS
Data as of2025-12-31
Moat score
84/ 100

Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.

Full stock profile

Dive deeper into Philip Morris International Inc.'s moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View PM analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: Philip Morris International Inc. leads (84 / 100 vs 76 / 100 for Monster Beverage Corporation).
  • Segment focus: Monster Beverage Corporation has 4 segments (91.6% in Monster Energy Drinks); Philip Morris International Inc. has 3 segments (61.3% in Combustible Tobacco).
  • Primary market structure: Oligopoly vs Oligopoly. Pricing power: Moderate vs Strong.
  • Moat breadth: Monster Beverage Corporation has 5 moat types across 3 domains; Philip Morris International Inc. has 6 across 3.

Primary market context

Monster Beverage Corporation

Monster Energy Drinks

Market

Energy drinks

Geography

Global

Customer

Retail consumers (via bottlers/distributors and retailers); some direct-to-retail

Role

Brand owner, marketer, and RTD finished-goods seller

Revenue share

91.6%

Philip Morris International Inc.

Combustible Tobacco

Market

International combustible tobacco (primarily cigarettes)

Geography

Global (primarily ex-U.S.)

Customer

Adult smokers; distributors/wholesalers and retail channels

Role

Branded manufacturer and distributor

Revenue share

61.3%

Side-by-side metrics

Monster Beverage Corporation
Philip Morris International Inc.
Ticker / Exchange
MNST - Nasdaq Global Select Market
PM - New York Stock Exchange
Market cap (USD)
$65.7B
n/a
Sector
Consumer
Consumer
HQ country
US
US
Primary segment
Monster Energy Drinks
Combustible Tobacco
Market structure
Oligopoly
Oligopoly
Market share
33%-35% (reported)
25.3% (reported)
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Moderate
Strong
Moat score
76 / 100
84 / 100
Moat domains
Supply, Demand, Legal
Demand, Supply, Legal
Last update
2025-12-31
2025-12-31

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

Distribution ControlBrand Trust

Monster Beverage Corporation strengths

Preferential Input AccessContractual ExclusivitySpecialty flavor formulations (AFF)

Philip Morris International Inc. strengths

Compliance AdvantageInstalled Base ConsumablesIP Choke PointRegulated Standards Pipe

Segment mix

Monster Beverage Corporation segments

Full profile >

Monster Energy Drinks

Oligopoly

91.6%

Strategic Brands

Oligopoly

5.8%

Alcohol Brands

Competitive

2.3%

Other (AFF Third-Party Products)

Competitive

0.3%

Philip Morris International Inc. segments

Full profile >

Combustible Tobacco

Oligopoly

61.3%

Smoke-Free Products

Oligopoly

37.8%

Wellness & Healthcare

Competitive

0.9%

Want the full wide moat stocks list?

Browse the full ranking of wide moat stocks, updated with moat scores and segment context.

View the moat stocks list

Curation & Accuracy

This directory blends AI‑assisted discovery with human curation. Entries are reviewed, edited, and organized with the goal of expanding coverage and sharpening quality over time. Your feedback helps steer improvements (because no single human can capture everything all at once).

Details change. Pricing, features, and availability may be incomplete or out of date. Treat listings as a starting point and verify on the provider’s site before making decisions. If you spot an error or a gap, send a quick note and I’ll adjust.