CSGP vs. MNST

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) and Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST).

Performance

CSGP vs. MNST - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) and Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CSGP vs. MNST - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CSGP CoStar Group, Inc.	-40.01%	-6.08%	-18.08%	13.08%	-2.21%	-14.50%	54.48%	77.36%	13.60%	57.54%
MNST Monster Beverage Corporation	-5.49%	45.87%	-8.77%	13.48%	5.72%	3.85%	45.52%	29.11%	-22.23%	42.74%

Fundamentals

Market Cap CSGP : $16.93B MNST : $71.50B
EPS CSGP : $0.02 MNST : $1.93
PE Ratio CSGP : 2.27K MNST : 37.47
PS Ratio CSGP : 5.23 MNST : 8.61
PB Ratio CSGP : 2.03 MNST : 8.66
Total Revenue (TTM) CSGP : $3.25B MNST : $8.29B
Gross Profit (TTM) CSGP : $2.52B MNST : $4.63B
EBITDA (TTM) CSGP : $201.20M MNST : $2.51B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSGP achieves a -40.01% return, which is significantly lower than MNST's -5.49% return. Over the past 10 years, CSGP has underperformed MNST with an annualized return of 8.02%, while MNST has yielded a comparatively higher 12.42% annualized return.

CSGP

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: -9.61%
• YTD: -40.01%
• 6M: -52.19%
• 1Y: -49.08%
• 3Y*: -16.32%
• 5Y*: -14.08%
• 10Y*: 8.02%

MNST

• 1D: 1.60%
• 1M: -15.05%
• YTD: -5.49%
• 6M: 7.65%
• 1Y: 23.82%
• 3Y*: 10.29%
• 5Y*: 9.67%
• 10Y*: 12.42%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

CSGP vs. MNST — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CSGP

CSGP Risk / Return Rank: 5
CSGP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
CSGP Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
CSGP Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CSGP Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
CSGP Martin Ratio Rank: 4

MNST

MNST Risk / Return Rank: 73
MNST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
MNST Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
MNST Omega Ratio Rank: 69
MNST Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
MNST Martin Ratio Rank: 78

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CSGP vs. MNST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) and Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	CSGP	MNST	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-1.24	1.04	-2.27
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-1.77	1.53	-3.30
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.75	1.20	-0.45
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.83	1.43	-2.26
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-1.79	5.21	-7.00
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CSGP vs. MNST - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSGP Sharpe Ratio is -1.24, which is lower than the MNST Sharpe Ratio of 1.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSGP and MNST, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CSGP	MNST	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.24	1.04	-2.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.41	0.41	-0.82
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.25	0.48	-0.23
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.33	0.59	-0.26

Correlation

The correlation between CSGP and MNST is 0.23, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

CSGP vs. MNST - Dividend Comparison

Neither CSGP nor MNST has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

CSGP vs. MNST - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSGP drawdown since its inception was -71.11%, roughly equal to the maximum MNST drawdown of -69.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSGP and MNST.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSGP	MNST	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.11%	-69.17%	-1.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-58.93%	-17.70%	-41.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-60.13%	-26.62%	-33.51%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-60.13%	-30.42%	-29.71%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-59.55%	-16.39%	-43.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.98%	-20.76%	-1.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	27.44%	4.84%	+22.60%

Volatility

CSGP vs. MNST - Volatility Comparison

CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) has a higher volatility of 10.60% compared to Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST) at 6.66%. This indicates that CSGP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MNST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CSGP	MNST	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.60%	6.66%	+3.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.90%	16.11%	+16.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.86%	23.11%	+16.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.38%	23.76%	+10.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.42%	26.17%	+6.25%

Financials

CSGP vs. MNST - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between CoStar Group, Inc. and Monster Beverage Corporation over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

CSGP - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, CoStar Group, Inc. reported a gross profit of 665.00M and revenue of 900.00M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 73.9%.

MNST - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Monster Beverage Corporation reported a gross profit of 1.18B and revenue of 2.13B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 55.5%.

CSGP - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, CoStar Group, Inc. reported an operating income of 49.00M and revenue of 900.00M, resulting in an operating margin of 5.4%.

MNST - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Monster Beverage Corporation reported an operating income of 542.63M and revenue of 2.13B, resulting in an operating margin of 25.5%.

CSGP - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, CoStar Group, Inc. reported a net income of 47.00M and revenue of 900.00M, resulting in a net margin of 5.2%.

MNST - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Monster Beverage Corporation reported a net income of 449.19M and revenue of 2.13B, resulting in a net margin of 21.1%.