Advertisement
COST or MNST or TGT
Which Stock Would AI Choose? Costco Wholesale (COST) vs. Monster Beverage (MNST) vs. Target (TGT) Stock Comparison
Key Takeaways
- COST leads YTD performance at +12.91% with a market cap of $431B and P/E of 50.5, driven by strong membership growth and earnings beats.
- MNST shows +3.89% YTD amid recent pullbacks despite Q4 sales growth of 17.6%, trading at P/E 38 with $72B market cap.
- TGT tops YTD gains at +17.05% with lowest P/E of 13.9 and $51B market cap, supported by price cuts and store expansions.
- COST offers stability in consumer staples via membership model, while TGT provides value amid retail recovery.
- MNST faces valuation pressure in beverages but benefits from international momentum.
- All three exhibit resilience in recent market volatility, with varying growth and risk profiles.
Introduction
This comparison examines COST, MNST, and TGT—key players in consumer staples and retail. Costco Wholesale operates membership warehouses, Monster Beverage dominates energy drinks, and Target focuses on general merchandise. Traders seeking defensive positions amid economic uncertainty and investors eyeing relative performance in discount retail and beverages will find value here. Recent earnings, price actions, and sector dynamics highlight contrasts in momentum, valuation, and growth potential, aiding informed stock comparison decisions.
COST Overview and Recent Performance
Costco Wholesale (COST) runs a global network of membership-based warehouses offering bulk goods. In recent market activity, shares traded around $972, reflecting YTD gains of 12.91% versus the S&P 500's 4.95%. Q2 fiscal 2026 earnings beat estimates with robust membership income and comparable sales up 7.1%, fueled by e-commerce and international strength. Sentiment remains positive on operational excellence and low pricing, though consumer staples valuations face scrutiny. Market cap stands at $431B with a trailing P/E of 50.5, signaling premium pricing for stability.
MNST Overview and Recent Performance
Monster Beverage (MNST) markets energy drinks like Monster Energy through global distribution. Shares hovered near $74 recently, with YTD return at +3.89% amid broader market shifts. Q4 2025 sales rose 17.6% to $2.13B, beating forecasts on U.S. and international demand, though shares dipped post-earnings on valuation concerns. Recent weeks saw pullbacks of about 11% monthly, influenced by category slowdowns, yet analysts highlight growth potential. Market cap is $72B, trailing P/E 38, reflecting high expectations for beverages expansion.
TGT Overview and Recent Performance
Target (TGT) operates discount stores with apparel, groceries, and essentials. Shares traded around $113, posting strong YTD gains of 17.05%. Recent price cuts on 3,000+ items and a $2B investment in stores and AI delivery drove momentum, countering prior sales declines. Comparable sales pressures eased with traffic improvements, boosting sentiment. At $51B market cap and P/E of 13.9, it appears attractively valued amid retail recovery efforts.
Trending AI Robots
Tickeron’s Trending AI Robots page showcases 25 top-performing AI trading bots selected from 351 total bots that trade thousands of tickers. These curated agents excel in current conditions, with annualized returns ranging from +15% to +188%, win rates of 55-89%, and profit factors up to 12.17. Examples include the USAR/SMR/CIFR bot at +188% annualized (75% win rate) and semiconductors SOXL strategies at +99% (69% win rate). Bots employ diverse styles like swing trading, trend following, and hedging across timeframes from 5min to 60min, targeting sectors including consumer staples with tickers like TGT. Explore these for data-driven insights into market opportunities.
Head-to-Head Comparison
COST’s warehouse model ensures recurring revenue via memberships, contrasting MNST’s brand-driven beverages growth and TGT’s broad retail exposure. Growth drivers: COST e-commerce (double-digit), MNST international (16%+), TGT omnichannel expansions. Recent momentum favors TGT (+17% YTD), over COST (+13%) and MNST (+4%). Risks include COST/MNST high P/E (50+/38 vs. TGT 14), consumer spending for TGT. Valuations sensitive to earnings: TGT offers value, COST stability premium, MNST"> growth trade-offs. Sentiment tilts defensive for staples amid volatility.
Tickeron AI Verdict
Tickeron’s AI currently favors TGT due to its leading YTD momentum, lowest valuation (P/E 14), and catalysts like price reductions and expansions amid retail positioning. While COST shows trend consistency and stability, and MNST offers growth, TGT’s relative value suggests higher probability of outperformance in the near term based on observable factors.
Disclaimer
The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer. Disclaimers and Limitations
Long-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).
COST’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileMNST’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s), and TGT’s FA Score reflects 2 green FA rating(s).
- COST’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- MNST’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- TGT’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
Short-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.
If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.
COST’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MNST’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s), and TGT’s TA Score reflects 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- COST’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.
- MNST’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
- TGT’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
COST (@Discount Stores) experienced а +0.14% price change this week, while MNST (@Beverages: Non-Alcoholic) price change was +2.74% , and TGT (@Discount Stores) price fluctuated +4.88% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Discount Stores industry was +2.91%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.54%, and the average quarterly price growth was +9.51%.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Beverages: Non-Alcoholic industry was -1.29%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.30%, and the average quarterly price growth was +83822.82%.
Reported Earning Dates
COST is expected to report earnings on Jul 29, 2026.
MNST is expected to report earnings on Apr 30, 2026.
TGT is expected to report earnings on May 20, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Discount Stores (+2.91% weekly)Companies in the discount stores industry specialize in offering substantial discounts on a vast array of retail products. Some companies in this industry also operate general merchandise warehouse clubs. Products sold at discount stores are typically similar to those of any department store, but the pricing of the goods is generally much lower (and hence the name “discount”). Think Dollar General Corporation, Dollar Tree, Inc. and Five Below, Inc. Many discount stores target low-income households and/or price-sensitive consumers as their potential market. Discount stores’ profitability could hinge on factors like competitive pricing, sufficient locations, healthy revenue per square foot, and effective advertisement. These store operators could have an edge over other retailers during financial crises or recessions, when many consumers could be looking for less expensive alternatives.
@Beverages: Non-Alcoholic (-1.29% weekly)Non-alcoholic drinks include traces of alcohol or low alcohol content or without alcohol or alcohol removed. Functional Beverages, Carbonated Soft Drinks (CSDs), Sports Drinks, Fruit Beverages, and Bottled Water are some common types of non-alcoholic beverages. The largest segment in this market is soft drinks (think Pepsi and Coke). Many established companies in this space have also been stepping up production of low to zero-calorie varieties in recent years, to cater to a rising number of health-conscious consumers. Coca-Cola Company, Pepsico Inc, Keurig Dr Pepper Inc. and Monster Beverage Corporation are some major non-alcoholic beverage makers.
| COST | MNST | TGT | |
| Capitalization | 443B | 75.5B | 59B |
| EBITDA | 14.1B | 2.53B | 8.35B |
| Gain YTD | 16.109 | 0.730 | 34.531 |
| P/E Ratio | 51.89 | 39.81 | 16.01 |
| Revenue | 286B | 8.29B | 105B |
| Total Cash | 18.2B | 2.77B | 5.49B |
| Total Debt | 8.17B | 199M | 20.3B |
COST | MNST | TGT | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 94 Overvalued | 92 Overvalued | 67 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 11 | 24 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 32 | 35 | 38 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 35 | 50 | 12 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 73 | 62 | 24 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 85 | 23 |
Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.
TGT's Valuation (67) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as MNST (92) in the Beverages Non Alcoholic industry, and is in the same range as COST (94) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that TGT's stock grew similarly to MNST’s and similarly to COST’s over the last 12 months.
COST's Profit vs Risk Rating (11) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as MNST (24) in the Beverages Non Alcoholic industry, and is significantly better than the same rating for TGT (100) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that COST's stock grew similarly to MNST’s and significantly faster than TGT’s over the last 12 months.
COST's SMR Rating (32) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as MNST (35) in the Beverages Non Alcoholic industry, and is in the same range as TGT (38) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that COST's stock grew similarly to MNST’s and similarly to TGT’s over the last 12 months.
TGT's Price Growth Rating (12) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as COST (35) in the Specialty Stores industry, and is somewhat better than the same rating for MNST (50) in the Beverages Non Alcoholic industry. This means that TGT's stock grew similarly to COST’s and somewhat faster than MNST’s over the last 12 months.
TGT's P/E Growth Rating (24) in the Specialty Stores industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MNST (62) in the Beverages Non Alcoholic industry, and is somewhat better than the same rating for COST (73) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that TGT's stock grew somewhat faster than MNST’s and somewhat faster than COST’s over the last 12 months.
| COST | MNST | TGT | |
|---|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 40% | 4 days ago 79% | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 68% | 4 days ago 44% | 4 days ago 57% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 47% | 4 days ago 52% | 4 days ago 64% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 56% | 4 days ago 60% | 4 days ago 52% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 65% | 4 days ago 58% | 4 days ago 67% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 62% | 4 days ago 49% | 4 days ago 68% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 63% | 4 days ago 58% | 4 days ago 67% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 38% | 6 days ago 47% | 8 days ago 64% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 43% | 4 days ago 51% | 4 days ago 71% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 51% | 4 days ago 50% | 6 days ago 51% |
Advertisement
COST and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, COST has been loosely correlated with WMT. These tickers have moved in lockstep 57% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if COST jumps, then WMT could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To COST | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COST | 100% | +1.28% | ||
| WMT - COST | 57% Loosely correlated | +2.15% | ||
| BJ - COST | 46% Loosely correlated | -0.18% | ||
| PSMT - COST | 30% Poorly correlated | +3.26% | ||
| OLLI - COST | 26% Poorly correlated | +0.30% | ||
| TGT - COST | 23% Poorly correlated | +3.17% | ||
More | ||||
TGT and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, TGT has been loosely correlated with DLTR. These tickers have moved in lockstep 33% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if TGT jumps, then DLTR could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To TGT | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TGT | 100% | +1.83% | ||
| DLTR - TGT | 33% Loosely correlated | +1.25% | ||
| DG - TGT | 26% Poorly correlated | -0.17% | ||
| PSMT - TGT | 26% Poorly correlated | -1.59% | ||
| COST - TGT | 25% Poorly correlated | -0.21% | ||
| OLLI - TGT | 24% Poorly correlated | -1.20% | ||
More | ||||