Skip to main content
Homepage
OLDER Analysis Report
Aug 31, 2026
37 days ago · 100% complete
This report is 37 days old — newer filings and price moves since then are not reflected.
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.

Our current read (analysis of 2026-10-07): Designation Watch · Gem Score -7 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 46 · Value -43 · Sentiment 17 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $113.74 vs $141.07 at analysis

Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable reference-name attribute you can cite):

  • profile-header / price-overview — company profile, live quote, market cap
  • extended-analysis — the core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-narrative / ai-findings / gpt-critique — narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)
  • Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers): price-history, income-trend, key-metrics, financials (statement tables), insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.

More for machine readers: site briefing at /llms.txt · any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER · raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds); every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.

PepsiCo, Inc.

PEP NASDAQ
Consumer Defensive · Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Purchase, NY 10577, United States pepsico.com Updated Aug 31, 3:00am
Price
$141.07
Market Cap
$192.7B
Employees
306,000
Beta
0.36
Avg Volume
7,111,820
Last Dividend
$5.81
CEO
Mr. Ramon Luis Laguarta

PepsiCo, Inc. is a global food and beverage company that develops, markets, and distributes a broad portfolio of snacks, packaged foods, and non-alcoholic drinks. PepsiCo’s current business is organized around convenient foods and beverages, with brands spanning salty snacks, cereals, ready-to-drink beverages, sports drinks, bottled water, and flavored soft drinks. Its products reach consumers through grocery, convenience, foodservice, and e-commerce channels across more than 200 countries and territories. The company plays a major role in the consumer staples market by supplying everyday food and beverage products to households, retailers, and institutions. PepsiCo, Inc. is headquartered in Purchase, New York.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 4, 2026 12:13am
Price Overview
Price at report time
$141.07
as of Aug 28, 6:22pm (40d ago)
Change · Aug 28
+1.35 (+0.97%)
Day Range
$140.00 – $141.29
52-Week Range
$133.73 – $171.48
50-Day MA
$139.81
200-Day MA
$148.93
Volume
5,462,892.00
Right now · live
Log in to get the live feed
Members see the real-time price and the move since this report (over 40d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 1,364,891,558.00
Float 1,361,820,552.00
Free Float 99.8%
High free float — 99.8% of shares trade freely, ~0.2% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 31, 2026 3:17am (37d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 31, 2026 3:17am (37d ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
Industry comparison last run: Aug 31, 2026 3:07am
P/E · trailing (TTM) (Price per dollar of earnings over the past year — not a run-rate or forward P/E)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
23.51
Stock Price: $141.07
EPS (Diluted): 6.00
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
9.43
Stock Price: $141.07
Total Equity: $20.55B
Shares: 1,373,000,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
15.57
Market Cap: $192.70B
Total Debt: $49.18B
Cash: $9.16B
EBITDA: $14.95B
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$232.7B
Market Cap: $192.70B
Total Debt: $49.18B
Cash: $9.16B
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
54.1%
Gross Profit: $50.86B
Revenue: $93.93B
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
12.2%
Operating Income: $11.50B
Revenue: $93.93B
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
8.8%
Net Income: $8.24B
Revenue: $93.93B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
40.1%
Net Income: $8.24B
Total Equity: $20.55B
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
15.4%
Operating Income: $11.50B
Tax Rate: 19.0%
Equity: $20.55B
Total Debt: $49.18B
Cash: $9.16B
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
0.85
Current Assets: $27.95B
Current Liabilities: $32.76B
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
2.39
Short-Term Debt: $6.86B
Long-Term Debt: $42.32B
Total Debt: $49.18B
Total Equity: $20.55B
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$68.41
Revenue: $93.93B
Shares: 1,373,000,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$14.97
Total Equity: $20.55B
Shares: 1,373,000,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$5.59
Operating CF: $12.09B
CapEx: -$4.42B
Shares: 1,373,000,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
4.1%
Last Dividend: $5.81
Stock Price: $141.07
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
92.7%
Dividends Paid: -$7.64B
Net Income: $8.24B
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 31, 2026 3:07am
Compares PEP against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 31, 2026 3:17am (37d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $79.5B $86.4B $91.5B $91.9B $93.9B
Cost of Revenue $37.1B $40.6B $41.9B $41.7B $43.1B
Gross Profit $42.4B $45.8B $49.6B $50.1B $50.9B
Operating Expenses $31.2B $34.3B $37.6B $37.2B $39.4B
Operating Income $11.2B $11.5B $12.0B $12.9B $11.5B
Net Income $7.6B $8.9B $9.1B $9.6B $8.2B
EBITDA $13.9B $14.3B $14.9B $16.0B $14.9B
EPS $5.51 $6.45 $6.59 $6.97 $6.02
EPS (Diluted) $5.49 $6.42 $6.56 $6.95 $6.00
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 31, 2026 3:00am (37d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $5.6B $5.0B $9.7B $8.5B $9.2B
Total Current Assets $21.8B $21.5B $27.0B $25.8B $27.9B
Total Assets $92.4B $92.2B $100.5B $99.5B $107.4B
Current Liabilities $26.2B $26.8B $31.6B $31.5B $32.8B
Long-Term Debt $36.0B $35.7B $37.6B $37.2B $42.3B
Total Liabilities $76.2B $74.9B $81.9B $81.3B $86.9B
Total Equity $16.2B $17.3B $18.6B $18.2B $20.5B
Retained Earnings $65.2B $67.8B $70.0B $72.3B $72.8B
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 31, 2026 3:17am (37d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow $11.6B $10.8B $13.4B $12.5B $12.1B
Capital Expenditure -$4.6B -$5.2B -$5.5B -$5.3B -$4.4B
Free Cash Flow $7.0B $5.6B $7.9B $7.2B $7.7B
Acquisitions (net) — — — — —
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) $667.0M $919.0M $2.5B $156.0M $4.1B
Dividends Paid -$5.8B -$6.2B -$6.7B -$7.2B -$7.6B
Stock Buybacks -$106.0M -$1.5B -$1.0B -$1.0B -$1.0B
Net Change in Cash -$2.5B -$607.0M $4.7B -$1.2B $651.0M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 31, 2026 3:17am (37d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth +8.7% +5.9% +0.4% +2.3%
Gross Profit Growth +8.1% +8.2% +1.0% +1.5%
Operating Income Growth +3.1% +4.1% +7.5% -10.8%
Net Income Growth +17.0% +1.8% +5.6% -14.0%
EBITDA Growth +2.9% +4.6% +7.5% -6.8%
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 31, 2026 3:00am (37d ago)
Date Dividend Declaration Record Payment
2026-09-04 $1.48 — — —
2026-06-05 $1.48 — — —
2026-03-06 $1.42 — — —
2025-12-05 $1.42 — — —
2025-09-05 $1.42 — — —
2025-06-06 $1.42 — — —
2025-03-07 $1.36 — — —
2024-12-06 $1.36 — — —
2024-09-06 $1.36 — — —
2024-06-07 $1.36 — — —
2024-02-29 $1.27 — — —
2023-11-30 $1.27 — — —
2023-08-31 $1.27 — — —
2023-06-01 $1.27 — — —
2023-03-02 $1.15 — — —
2022-12-01 $1.15 — — —
2022-09-01 $1.15 — — —
2022-06-02 $1.15 — — —
2022-03-03 $1.08 — — —
2021-12-02 $1.08 — — —
0Company Classification 1Industry Landscape 2Company Momentum 3Forward Projection 4aDCF Valuation 4bEarnings Power Value 4cAnchored PE 4dReverse DCF 4eRevenue-Based DCF 4fAnchored P/S 4gScenario Analysis 4hDividend Discount Model 4iBook Value Analysis 4jInsider Activity 4fCash Flow Quality 4gDebt Maturity Risk 4hMacro Environment 4iSector Intelligence 4jRevenue Confidence 4kSensitivity Analysis 4lSector Demand Cycle 5AI Investigation 5bThesis Evaluation 6Valuation Synthesis
computed not applicable errored 18 computed · 5 not applicable · 1 errored
Risk : Reward — upside vs downside from this company's own quarters
Computed 2026-10-06 02:03
-0.2 : 1 +1σ upside vs −1σ downside, from this company's own quarterly history
A +1σ run of quarters pays -8%; a −1σ run costs 46%. Ratio -0.2:1 (μ 4.3%, σ 3.8% , 16 pairs).
Older method (repeat-worst-quarter): 0.7 : 1
CaseGrowthMarginFair valuevs price ($141.07)
Bull — recovery +7% 17.3% $176.91 +25%
Base — stabilizes +5% 15.0% $143.93 +2%
Bear — keeps slipping +2% 12.8% $114.79 -19%
Stress — last quarter repeats +3% 9.7% $90.55 -36%
Upside — a +1σ run of quarters (v2) +8% 11.9% $129.82 -8%
Stress — a −1σ run of quarters (v2) +1% 8.7% $76.35 -46%
The next quarters keep the trajectory of the worst recent matched quarter (ending 2025-09-06) — growth stays at 2.7% and margins bend by the same profit-vs-revenue ratio (×0.90). Stress is a trajectory, not a prediction — it answers "what if the ship's current heading simply continues," which history says is the case to respect.
Why this is appearing: this company files quarterly, so its recent trajectory could be measured rather than assumed — the engine matched Jun 2026, Mar 2026 against the same quarters one year earlier and found revenue +7.3% · operating income +65.5% · net income +71.4% year-over-year. That measured heading is what the stress case extends forward. Of those, the stress case extends the worst matched quarter — the one ending Sep 6, 2025 (revenue +2.6%, operating income -7.8% YoY) — not the average. Data measured through Jun 13, 2026 — this card recalculates automatically when the next quarterly filing is ingested. Companies without quarterly filings (many foreign listings) never show this card: with no measured trajectory, there is nothing honest to repeat.
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for PEP — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-08-31 03:28

The question every valuation on this page silently assumes: is this company likely to grow? Judged forward — the business, its category, the world — against what's already printed.

Holding PepsiCo is a low-single-digit organic grower losing share inside a mid-single-digit category; the optical +7.3% revenue / +65.5% operating income matched-quarter jump is largely a comparison against prior-year impairment and mix noise, not a new growth engine — earnings power holds rather than compounds. conf 7/10
Share loss Category growing · Non-alcoholic beverages/convenient foods is expanding — 5.9% industry revenue CAGR over three years, 8.2% recent YoY, category median 5.2% — while PepsiCo grows 2.3%. The company grows, but at roughly a third of the category rate, a -5.9pp gap.
Next 2 quarters
Holding
Easy prior-year comps on impairments and continued productivity capture keep reported operating income and EPS up, while organic revenue stays low single digit with negative-to-flat North America volume. Expect flattering optics on profit, unimpressive top line.
≈ inline with expectations
Year 1
Holding
Full-year organic growth of roughly 2-3% with mid-single-digit constant-currency EPS growth from productivity, not volume. International carries the line; North America Foods remains flat-to-slightly-down on volume with price offsetting.
≈ inline with expectations
Years 2–3
Holding
Structural earnings power is preserved by pricing, DSD scale and international penetration, but the -5.9pp share gap and a 1.3% multi-year revenue CAGR with negative earnings CAGR say compounding has stalled at the enterprise level. Portfolio reshaping is directionally right but too small versus the base to inflect the growth rate within three years.
↓ below expectations
The creme: each rung's call measured against what's already printed (vs analyst estimates · vs guidance / FY consensus · vs price-implied growth) — expectations in print are already in the price, so only the variant margin can pay. Hover a rung's chip for the margin read.
Growth drivers
44 International as the actual growth engine — Multi-year record shows the consolidated line barely moving (revenue CAGR 1.3%) while the industry compounds 5.9-8.2%; the delta is a weak North America and a healthier international franchise. Emerging-market snacks and beverages (India, Mexico, Africa/Middle East) still deliver mid-to-high single digit organic growth on volume plus price, and now represent a large enough share to hold the total line positive even if US volumes stay flat.
39 Cost/productivity program restoring reported earnings — Recent matched-quarter operating income +65.5% and net income +71.4% against revenue +7.3% is too wide to be operational leverage — it is comping over prior-year brand impairments plus genuine productivity capture (network consolidation, automation, reduced complexity in Frito-Lay). This mechanically lifts reported EPS in the next several prints even with flat volume, and supports the recent pattern of 0-4% EPS beats.
27 Portfolio reshaping toward permissible and functional — Additions in functional soda, protein and better-for-you snacks, plus reformulation and multipack/value architecture in Frito-Lay, address the exact reason share is being lost. These are real revenue lines, but they start small relative to a ~$92B base — they change the mix story faster than they change the growth rate.
33 Pricing and shelf control as a floor — Direct-store-delivery scale and category-captain status let PepsiCo take low-single-digit price nearly every year and defend distribution. This is why 'all years positive' holds and volatility is only 0.9% — it caps downside more than it creates upside.
Growth risks
64 Documented share loss versus the category — Company recent YoY 2.3% against industry 8.2% — a -5.9pp gap, and category median recent growth of 5.2%. That is the single most damaging datapoint in the brief: the market is expanding and PepsiCo is not capturing it. Share loss of this size is a customer-preference and channel problem, not a promotion problem.
54 North America salty-snack volume erosion — Frito-Lay volume has been the drag on the consolidated line for several years: value-seeking consumers trading to private label and club packs, plus incremental GLP-1 and health-labeling pressure on high-calorie savory snacking. Growth has been carried by price, and the multi-year earnings CAGR of -4.7% shows price alone no longer converts to profit growth.
39 Sector cycle turning down — Sector phase reads slowdown with demand score -1, and industry net margins have compressed 2.2pp over three years even as gross margins expanded — i.e. the category is spending the gross-margin gain on promotion and A&M to defend volume. That is the environment where a share loser must reinvest, capping margin upside.
36 Decelerating quarterly trend beneath the optics — Revenue confidence flags the quarterly trend as decelerating and recent earnings YoY at -14%; the flattering matched-quarter figures rest on soft prior-year comps that fade within roughly two to three quarters.
20 FX and macro — Macro headwinds with 10y at 4.67% pressure the value-seeking US consumer, while a large international mix makes translated growth swing on currency — a factor management cannot control and which has repeatedly clipped reported growth.
The world is not turning against packaged food and drink; it is turning against PepsiCo's center of gravity. Demand is migrating to functional, protein-forward, lower-sugar and private-label alternatives, and the retail channel is rewarding value packs and club formats over the impulse convenience occasions that Frito-Lay's DSD system was built to monetize. GLP-1 adoption and front-of-pack labeling are slow, cumulative pressures on high-calorie savory snacking rather than a cliff. Offsetting this, emerging-market snacking penetration is still rising and PepsiCo has real distribution there. Net: the category grows, the incumbent's specific occasions do not, so the business holds its earnings power through price, productivity and international mix rather than through unit demand.
Growth position composite -28
ShrinkingStallingHoldingGrowingAccelerating
50Next 2 quarters · Holding
50Year 1 · Holding
50Years 2–3 · Holding
-28Composite (−100…+100)
A research prediction, not advice. Forward-graded: each rung is scored against the prints that follow it. Not an input to the GEM designation — track record first.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-31 03:17:14
Verdict Overvalued but not egregiously so — fair value $110-120, not the $85 composite; trim above $140, revisit under $120, don't initiate here.

Looking at the raw numbers first: PEP's five-year revenue CAGR is a genuine 4.3% ($79.5B→$93.9B), but the more recent trajectory has flattened hard — 2023→2024→2025 goes $91.5B→$91.9B→$93.9B, essentially inflation-driven pricing with no volume. Net income is worse: $9.58B (2024) → $8.24B (2025), a 14% decline, and the quarterly margin series is genuinely noisy (5.5%, 12.6%, 10.2%, 5.6%, 10.9%, 8.7%, 12%, 12.3%) suggesting recurring restructuring/impairment charges rather than clean earnings power. FCF of $7.67B against a $192.7B market cap is a 4% FCF yield — thin for a no-growth business. The payout ratio at 92.7% with a 4.11% dividend yield is the load-bearing wall of the thesis; if earnings slip another 10%, the dividend narrative cracks. Debt/equity of 2.39 and current ratio 0.85 aren't alarming for a staple, but the $49B debt load limits buyback flexibility.

On the prior models: the synthesis fair value of $85-108 vs. $141 feels directionally right but the low end is aggressive. A 4% FCF yield on $7.67B capitalized at a staples-appropriate 5.5-6% discount rate (reflecting the bond-proxy nature) gets you closer to $128-140B enterprise value, or roughly $85-95/share equity after netting $40B net debt — so the synthesis's $85 signal-adjusted number is defensible on a strict DCF, but ignores that PEP has historically traded at premium multiples for a reason (distribution moat, Frito-Lay's genuine pricing power in salty snacks where private label has failed for 40 years). Market Forces calling this a "deteriorating business facing structural demand destruction from GLP-1" is overwrought — Frito-Lay volumes have softened but haven't collapsed, and the GLP-1 thesis has been front-page for two years without showing up meaningfully in Pepsi's revenue line. That's either a slow-burn thesis or a wrong one; skepticism warranted either way.

The contrarian case worth taking seriously: PEP screens as overvalued on every backward-looking metric, but the H1 2026 prints ($24.18B and $19.44B revenue, 12.3% and 12% margins) are the best margin quarters in the dataset. If that persists — and it's only two quarters, so it might not — full-year 2026 could hit $95-97B revenue with $10-10.5B net income, putting forward P/E closer to 19x rather than 23.5x trailing. That's still not cheap, but it's not egregious for a KO/PEP-caliber franchise, and it would falsify the "deteriorating business" narrative. The insider activity is noise — the 900,000-share J-Other is almost certainly a trust/estate transfer, not a sale, and there's only one small S-Sale (2,900 shares). Market Forces overstates the insider signal.

Where I land: the models are directionally correct that PEP is expensive relative to its actual growth (1.3% revenue CAGR, -4.7% earnings CAGR is not a compounder, it's a stagnator with a dividend), but the fair-value anchors of $85-108 embed too much pessimism about the franchise durability. My read is fair value $110-120 — a genuine 15-20% overvaluation, not a 40% one. The narrative-economics framing is the most useful prior output: this is a bond-proxy trading on TINA demand from dividend indexers, and the risk isn't that Frito-Lay collapses, it's that a 10-year yield above 5% or two more quarters of earnings declines break the "sleep well" spell and force a re-rate to a 5% FCF yield ($153B market cap, ~$112/share). I dissent from the synthesis's magnitude but agree on direction. This is a hold-if-you-own-it, don't-initiate-here name; the asymmetry doesn't work at $141 when $115 is a plausible mean-reversion target on any earnings disappointment, and upside requires the H1 2026 margin recovery to persist for three more quarters — a real bet, not a lock.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-31 03:17:30
Verdict Overvalued at $141 — this is a high-quality but slow and recently less efficient staple, and fair value looks closer to $115-$125 unless margins and free cash flow visibly recover.

At $141, PepsiCo is being valued like a very stable compounder at a moment when the actual business looks more like a low-growth, margin-pressured staple. The revenue line is not broken, but it is clearly not doing enough to justify a premium multiple: sales went from $91.47B in 2023 to $91.85B in 2024 and $93.93B in 2025, just 2.3% growth last year and roughly 1.3% CAGR over the multi-year window. Meanwhile earnings have moved the wrong way. Net income was $9.58B in 2024 and fell to $8.24B in 2025, and quarterly profit has been choppy to weak: the latest four quarters sum to about $8.71B, still below the prior annual peak. The most recent reported quarter was decent on the surface at $24.18B of revenue and $2.98B of net income, but that follows a year where June-quarter margin cratered to 5.6% and the December quarter was only 8.7%. For a business sold as a fortress, the earnings consistency is not especially fortress-like right now.

The cash flow and balance sheet reinforce that this is a mature business with limited room for valuation error. Free cash flow of $7.67B against a $192.7B market cap is roughly a 4.0% FCF yield, not compelling for a company with basically flat real growth and some recent earnings deterioration. Debt of $49.18B against $9.16B of cash leaves substantial net leverage, and the capital structure matters because this is not a business where you can wave away a weak current ratio of 0.85 and debt/equity of 2.39 as irrelevant. Return metrics are still good — ROIC of 15.4% is real evidence of brand and distribution strength — but part of the gaudy 40.1% ROE is just leverage and a thin $20.55B equity base, not pure operating brilliance. Add a dividend yield of 4.1% but a payout ratio of 92.7%, and the picture is a company still capable of paying shareholders well, yet with far less cushion than the “bond substitute” crowd tends to assume.

That is why I do not buy the more dramatic “structural collapse” framing, but I also think the market is overpaying for safety. PepsiCo is still producing gross margin above 54%, operating cash flow above $12B, and quarterly revenue that continues to edge upward; this is not a melting ice cube in the sense of imminent economic decay. The food-and-beverage mix is genuinely resilient, and the latest two quarters — $19.44B and $24.18B of sales with 12.0% and 12.3% net margins — suggest management can still restore profitability after the softer 2025 periods. If you annualize the latest four quarters, revenue is roughly $96.9B, so there is some evidence of modest top-line progression beyond the annual 2025 print. A smart bull would also point out that 23.5x earnings is not insane for a global staples franchise with a 4% yield, especially if rates ease and investors keep paying up for durability.

But I weigh those positives differently because the stock already reflects them and then some. On 2.06x sales, 15.6x EV/EBITDA, and 23.5x earnings, you are not buying a turnaround multiple or even a plain defensive multiple; you are buying a premium franchise multiple despite revenue barely outgrowing inflation and net income shrinking. The latest annual operating income of $11.50B was down from $12.89B the prior year despite higher sales, which tells you the core issue is not demand collapse but weaker profit conversion. That matters because this investment case depends on pricing power and margin stability. If those are wobbling, the premium should compress. I do not see evidence here that deserves a panic bear case, but I do see enough to say fair value is materially below the current quote — more in the $115-$125 range, where the dividend and quality would compensate for the slow growth and leverage.

What would change my mind is straightforward. If PepsiCo can put up two or three consecutive quarters with revenue growth above 4%, net margin sustainably back above 11%-12%, and full-year free cash flow recovering into the $9B-$10B range without leverage worsening, then the premium multiple becomes easier to defend. I would also soften if annual operating income decisively reclaims and exceeds the 2024 level of $12.89B, because that would show 2025 was a temporary margin air pocket rather than a new earnings base. Conversely, if revenue stays stuck near 1%-2% growth while net income remains sub-$8.5B and the payout ratio stays near 90%+, then even $125 may prove too generous.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-31 03:17:53
Verdict Overvalued at $141; cash-flow reality supports ~$100–110, not a 23.5× multiple on declining earnings

PepsiCo’s raw numbers describe a high-quality franchise that has stopped compounding. Annual revenue crawled from $91.85B in 2024 to $93.93B in 2025 (+2.3%), while net income fell from $9.58B to $8.24B and operating income dropped from $12.89B to $11.50B. The multi-year picture is worse: revenue CAGR of only 1.3% against an earnings CAGR of –4.7% and FCF CAGR of –1.6%. Free cash flow remains real at $7.67B on $12.09B of operating cash, yet the 92.7% payout ratio leaves almost no retained earnings buffer, and the balance sheet carries $49.18B of debt against $20.55B of equity (D/E 2.39) with a sub-1.0 current ratio. At $141 the stock trades 23.5× trailing earnings, 15.6× EV/EBITDA and 9.4× book for a business whose recent quarterly net margins have swung between 5.6% and 12.3% and whose volume growth is essentially flat. The quantitative models that call this overvalued are directionally correct; the cash flows simply do not support a mid-20s multiple when both earnings and free cash flow are contracting.

The strongest counter-argument is that PepsiCo still prints mid-teens ROIC (15.4%), holds a 54% gross margin, and generates enough cash to fund a 4.1% dividend yield that retirement and staples flows treat as a bond substitute. The dual beverage-and-snacks moat, pricing power across 200 countries, and recession resilience are not imaginary, and the “steady-compounder” narrative has proven durable for decades. A bull can also note that 2025’s earnings drop may contain one-time noise and that the most recent two quarters restored double-digit net margins ($2.33B and $2.98B NI). Those points justify a premium to pure value, yet they do not justify a 65% gap between the ~$85–108 fundamental range implied by the cash flows and the $141 market price, especially when GLP-1 and health-trend headwinds are already visible in decelerating volume.

I would reverse the overvalued call only if the next two reported quarters show organic volume growth re-accelerating above 3%, operating margin stabilizing above 13%, and free-cash-flow coverage of the dividend moving comfortably below an 80% payout—evidence that pricing power is translating into real unit growth rather than just margin defense.

Qwen Reading local experiment · off-panel
Independent reading · qwen3.8:27b on the local GPU · generated 2026-08-28 16:26:40 · 52.1s (83.2 tok/s) · replay of 2026-08-09 panel
Fairly Valued · conviction 3/5 · bull 5/10
followed the VERDICT/STANCE contract
Verdict PEP at $139 is roughly fairly valued on 2026 forward earnings (~18x) with a ~8% combined FCF + dividend yield, but the 1.3% revenue CAGR, 2.4x D/E, and 93% payout ratio cap the upside; the 2025 margin trough was a one-quarter distortion, not a structural break, and the 2026 recovery to 12%+ margins is the real story the models are underweighting.

The number that jumps out at me isn't the 23x trailing P/E or the 1.3% revenue CAGR — it's the Q2 2025 margin of 5.6% sitting in the middle of an otherwise 10-12% margin band, and the fact that both 2026 quarters have already recovered to 12.0% and 12.3%. The 2025 annual net income of $8.24B, which the momentum layer flags as a -14% YoY decline, is almost entirely an artifact of that single quarter. Annualize the first half of 2026 ($2.98B + $2.33B = $5.31B) and you get roughly $10.6B of run-rate earnings, which puts the stock at about 18x forward, not 23x trailing. The Valuation Synthesis layer's $95.81 signal-adjusted fair value implies a multiple in the low-teens on a company generating $12.09B in operating cash flow and $7.67B in free cash flow with a 15.4% ROIC. I don't think that's a defensible anchor. The Market Forces layer's "GLP-1 structural decline" framing is, frankly, a stretch for a company where Frito-Lay and Quaker are as large as Pepsi Beverages; revenue is still growing 2.3% YoY in the most recent quarter, not contracting.

What I do take seriously is the balance sheet and the capital allocation constraint. $49.18B of total debt against $20.55B of equity is a 2.4x leverage ratio that is high for a consumer staples name, and the current ratio of 0.853 means current liabilities exceed current assets — a genuine liquidity tightness that the "fortress balance sheet" narrative glosses over. More importantly, the 92.7% payout ratio means PepsiCo is returning essentially all of its $7.67B FCF as dividends, leaving almost nothing for buybacks, debt paydown, or M&A. The 4.18% dividend yield is well-covered by operating cash flow, but the company has no financial flexibility if a commodity cost spike or an emerging-market FX shock hits simultaneously. The insider tape is unremarkable — a handful of small A-Award grants, one trivial 2,900-share sale, and two large J-Other entries (900,000 and 79,731 shares) that are too ambiguous to read as either conviction or distribution. There is no insider signal here, in either direction.

The strongest case against my read is the trajectory, not the level. Revenue CAGR of 1.3% over five years is effectively zero growth; the 8.7% jump in 2022 was inflation-driven price increases, not volume. Operating margin has compressed from 14.0% in 2021 to 12.2% in 2025, and even the 2026 recovery to 12.3% is below the 2021-2023 range. A smart bear would point out that the 2026 margin "recovery" could be a one-year commodity tailwind (palm oil, sugar, aluminum) that reverses in 2027, and that the 93% payout ratio means management has already committed the cash flow to the dividend, so any margin wobble hits the balance sheet directly rather than being absorbed by a buyback cushion. I weigh this differently because the 2026 quarters show the margin recovery is broad-based across both H1 periods, not a single-quarter fluke, and because a 15.4% ROIC on a $94B revenue base is still well above the cost of capital even in a zero-growth scenario.

The stock's 19% drawdown from $171 to $139 has already done a lot of the de-rating work. At $139, you're paying 2.03x sales, 15.4x EV/EBITDA, and getting a 4.0% FCF yield plus a 4.2% dividend — a combined ~8% cash return that is competitive with a 10-year Treasury in a falling-rate environment but unexciting in a rising-rate one. I don't see a 30% downside case to $95 unless the 2026 margin recovery fully reverses AND revenue growth goes negative, which would require a demand shock well beyond what GLP-1s or sugar regulation are currently producing. But I also don't see a 20% upside case to $170 unless the market re-rates the multiple on a growth inflection that the data doesn't yet support. This is a bond-with-a-kicker at current levels: the cash flows are real, the dividend is covered, but the equity story is "you get paid to wait" rather than "you get paid to be right."

What would flip me: a Q3 2026 print (due roughly late September) showing revenue growth below 1.5% YoY or operating margin back below 11% would confirm the 2026 recovery was a commodity blip and push me toward the overvalued camp. Conversely, two consecutive quarters of 12.5%+ operating margin with revenue growth above 2.5% would validate the 18x forward multiple and make me more comfortable holding. A dividend cut or a payout ratio above 100% would be an immediate red flag that the 4.18% yield is no longer sustainable. And if the 10-year Treasury yield climbs above 5%, the "defensive compounder" bid that has propped up this name loses its relative appeal versus risk-free alternatives.

Experiment only: this reading is not a panel seat and feeds nothing — compare it against the Claude, GPT and Grok readings above.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 1.3; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 2.0
overvalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +0.7 vs panel · self: 4.0
GPT gpt-5.4 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ -0.3 vs panel · self: 3.0
Grok grok-4.5 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ -0.3 vs panel · self: 2.0
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), and General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-31 03:29:29
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Quality - wait for a dip 7/10
High-quality staple at a full price - great business, wrong entry, so I wait rather than chase.
The cruxWhether PEP can defend pricing power and rebuild the 2025 margin dent - if it can't, the multiple compresses toward the $110-120 deserved zone.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from PEP's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionStable Share Count
Earnings QualityHigh Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+46
Strong
edge √Σ 137 · risk √Σ 87 · conf 8/10

Revenue has compounded steadily from 79.5B in 2021 to 93.9B in 2025 (roughly 4.3% CAGR), with gross margin expanding from 53.3% to a 54.6% peak in 2024 before easing to 54.1% in 2025. Operating margin has been range-bound around 13-14% but slipped to 12.2% in 2025, and net income fell from 9.58B (2024) to 8.24B (2025) - the first real profit dip in the window. Cash conversion remains excellent: OCF/NI at 1.4x, accruals a clean -3.5% of assets, FCF of 7.67B in 2025, and Altman Z of 3.45 in the safe zone. Capital returns are disciplined - diluted share count actually shrank slightly (1.39B to 1.37B), SBC is just 0.3% of revenue, and buybacks run 2.75x SBC, so per-share value is protected. The balance sheet is the main constraint: net debt of roughly 40B against only 9.5B liquid cash means the company is self-funding but has no cushion, and dividend plus buyback commitments are financed against a leveraged base. Insider tape is unremarkable - routine awards and one small 405K sale, no meaningful directional signal. The 2025 margin and net income softness is the standout blemish in an otherwise textbook staples profile.

Strengths 4
m78
Elite earnings quality
OCF/NI 1.4x, accruals -3.5% of assets, Altman Z 3.45 safe - reported earnings are backed by cash and no mechanical red flags.
m70
Per-share discipline
Diluted shares declined from 1.39B to 1.37B (-0.3% CAGR), SBC just 0.3% of revenue, buyback/SBC 275% - no dilution drag.
m68
Consistent cash generation
FCF averaged ~7B across five years (6.99, 5.60, 7.92, 7.19, 7.67B), demonstrating durable conversion through inflation and cost pressure.
m55
Revenue durability with GM expansion
Revenue grew every year 2021-2025 (79.5B to 93.9B) and gross margin expanded from 53.3% to 54.1%, evidence of pricing power in a staples franchise.
Concerns 3
m62
Leveraged balance sheet
Net debt of roughly 39.7B versus 9.5B liquid cash - cash is only 5% of market cap, leaving no cushion if FCF compresses.
m55
2025 profit reversal
Operating margin dropped from 14.0% to 12.2% and net income fell from 9.58B to 8.24B in 2025 despite revenue growth - the first genuine profitability deterioration in the window.
m25
Neutral-to-mild insider selling
Four sales totaling ~6.15M and zero open-market buys in twelve months - not alarming for a mature large cap but no conviction signal either.
This is a solidly Strong staples business - not a Fortress. The earnings quality is legitimately elite: cash conversion above 1x consistently, negative accruals, disciplined buybacks that actually shrink the count, and Altman Z in safe territory. What keeps me from a higher grade is two things I can see in the raw tape: (1) the balance sheet is levered - 40B net debt against a 9.5B cash pile is not a cushion, it's a commitment, and it means the dividend/buyback machine depends on FCF holding up; (2) 2025 shows the first real crack - operating margin fell 180bps and net income declined despite revenue growth, which suggests either input pressure, volume softness, or one-time charges I'd want to confirm. Nothing here suggests the business is impaired, but the trajectory is no longer uniformly up-and-to-the-right. Solid, healthy, boring in the good way - but with a real financial-leverage anchor and a fresh margin question mark.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • Cause of 2025 operating margin compression (mix, restructuring charges, commodity, or organic volume weakness) in the 10-K MD&A
  • Debt maturity ladder and weighted-average coupon given the -40B net debt position
  • Organic volume trends by segment (Frito-Lay NA, PBNA, international) - are staples volumes actually declining?
  • Any pending impairments or brand write-downs (Quaker recalls, juice divestitures) affecting 2025 GAAP results
  • Pension and lease-adjusted leverage to confirm Altman Z read is not understated
Valuation / Mispricing
-43
Rich
edge √Σ 32 · risk √Σ 79 · conf 6/10
price $141 vs deserved ~$115-120, roughly 15-20% overpay - modestly rich, not egregiously so. attractive below $115.00

The composite fair value sits at $107.86 and the signal-adjusted FV at $85.50, implying roughly 24-39% downside from $141.07. The anchored-PE of $150.67 is the only method that supports today's tape, and it essentially bakes in that PEP keeps earning its historical multiple despite flat volumes and a 2025 margin dent - a heroic assumption when the DCF ($110.35) and EPV floor ($60.06) both say the cash economics do not justify the price. Earnings quality is elite, so no haircut is warranted; the issue is not the numerator's honesty, it is that the market is paying a premium multiple for a business with structural volume and health headwinds. A Strong (not Fortress) staples franchise with 40B net debt deserves a solid multiple, but not a stretched one. My deserved value sits closer to $115-120 - I give some credit above the DCF for franchise durability and cash conversion, but I cannot get to $141 without assuming pricing power indefinitely offsets volume declines. That is roughly a 15-20% overpay, which puts this in Rich rather than Overvalued territory. The dividend and buyback cadence provide a floor, but not a margin of safety at this entry.

Cheap signals 2
m25
Elite earnings quality - no haircut needed
Cash conversion >1x, negative accruals, real buybacks. Deserved value should sit above the raw DCF, not below it - which is why I do not go full Overvalued.
m20
Franchise durability supports a premium to DCF
Global staples moat, 60-year dividend record, and shelf dominance justify some multiple premium - but 15-20%, not the 30%+ the market is paying.
Rich / priced-in 4
m55
Composite FV well below price
Composite $107.86 and signal-adjusted $85.50 both sit 24-39% under $141.07. Two of three methods (DCF, EPV) say the cash flows do not support the tape.
m40
Only anchored-PE justifies the price
Anchored-PE at $150.67 is the sole supportive method, and it relies on the historical multiple holding through a volume-weak, margin-pressured period - a circular 'priced like it always has been' argument.
m35
Priced for pricing power to keep working
Bear case is right that volume is flat and the algorithm leans on price. Paying 1.3x composite FV assumes elasticity never bites.
m18
EPV floor at $60 is a warning
Even discounting EPV as a no-growth floor, $60 vs $141 says a large chunk of the price is pure growth/multiple assumption in a low-growth category.
I like the business, I do not like the entry. Two of three valuation methods say deserved value is in the $60-110 range and only the multiple-anchored method rescues the price. Elite earnings quality and franchise durability let me push deserved value up to roughly $115-120, but that still leaves $141 as a 15-20% overpay. This is textbook 'great company, full price' - I want it below $115 before it is interesting, and I would get excited under $100. Fairly-valued-plus-a-tax, not a buy.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • 2026 organic volume trend by segment - Frito-Lay North America volume inflection is the swing factor
  • Productivity program savings realization vs guidance
  • Any change in dividend growth cadence signaling capital-allocation stress
  • GLP-1 impact commentary on snacking demand in transcripts
General Sentiment
+17
Tailwind
tail √Σ 78 · head √Σ 61 · conf 6/10

The macro tape is mildly risk-on with a low VIX, which normally works against a 0.36-beta staple like PEP - money rotates to higher-octane names and defensives lag. But that rotation is stale news here: consumer staples have already underperformed in 2026, and the narrative pendulum is starting to swing back as commentators frame PEP as a lagging value/dividend play worth accumulating. Cramer name-checking PEP on Mad Money, multiple 'buy for the dividend' articles, and Barron's-style value-stock framing in the last 72 hours are the kind of retail-narrative amplifiers that firm up a floor.

Tailwinds 3
m55
Dividend-aristocrat narrative reasserting
Multiple 72h pieces frame PEP as a 54-year dividend grower and income-for-life staple. This is a durable, low-cult narrative that attracts steady income-seeker flows regardless of the tape.
m50
Cramer + 'value stock to buy' coverage
Cramer flagged PEP on Mad Money as a defensive with high yield and oil-price relief, and a separate piece calls it 'the value stock to buy in August.' Retail-narrative endorsements on a lagging name tend to mark short-term sentiment lows.
m25
Analyst tone moderately optimistic
Coverage notes Wall Street maintains a moderately optimistic outlook despite the underperformance - no wave of downgrades is pressing the tape lower.
Headwinds 3
m35
Risk-on tape shuns low-beta defensives
With VIX at 14.4 and a mildly risk-on regime, capital rotates toward higher-beta growth. A 0.36 beta means PEP barely benefits from up tape and gets left behind in relative performance.
m40
Staples sector lagging + underperformance framing
Headlines explicitly note PEP has underperformed the consumer defensive sector and staples are lagging the S&P. That relative-weakness framing keeps momentum buyers away and can extend the drift.
m30
'Melting ice cube' bear whisper
The bear story - sugar taxes, GLP-1s, flat volumes, price-hike fatigue - is a slow-burn structural narrative that caps multiple expansion even when the tape cooperates.
Net mild tailwind. The macro tape isn't doing PEP any favors - risk-on with a sleepy VIX is exactly the environment where a 0.36-beta staple gets orphaned - but the narrative flow in the last week is quietly constructive: Cramer, 'value stock of the month,' dividend-for-life pieces. That's the kind of coverage that shows up near sentiment troughs on lagging defensives. The bear story exists but isn't intensifying. I'd call this a low-conviction tailwind: not a force that drives the stock, but enough to lean against the risk-on rotation and put a floor under the tape.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Whether staples-sector relative strength inflects (XLP vs SPY) in coming weeks
  • Any GLP-1 or sugar-tax headline that could reignite the melting-ice-cube bear narrative
  • Target revisions from major sell-side after next print - a downgrade cluster would flip this to headwind
  • 10y yield direction - a move lower is a direct tailwind to bond-proxy staples
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
Growth Outlook
-28
Holding
edge √Σ 73 · risk √Σ 101 · conf 7/10

The world is not turning against packaged food and drink; it is turning against PepsiCo's center of gravity. Demand is migrating to functional, protein-forward, lower-sugar and private-label alternatives, and the retail channel is rewarding value packs and club formats over the impulse convenience occasions that Frito-Lay's DSD system was built to monetize. GLP-1 adoption and front-of-pack labeling are slow, cumulative pressures on high-calorie savory snacking rather than a cliff. Offsetting this, emerging-market snacking penetration is still rising and PepsiCo has real distribution there. Net: the category grows, the incumbent's specific occasions do not, so the business holds its earnings power through price, productivity and international mix rather than through unit demand.

Growth drivers 4
m44
International as the actual growth engine
Multi-year record shows the consolidated line barely moving (revenue CAGR 1.3%) while the industry compounds 5.9-8.2%; the delta is a weak North America and a healthier international franchise. Emerging-market snacks and beverages (India, Mexico, Africa/Middle East) still deliver mid-to-high single digit organic growth on volume plus price, and now represent a large enough share to hold the total line positive even if US volumes stay flat.
m39
Cost/productivity program restoring reported earnings
Recent matched-quarter operating income +65.5% and net income +71.4% against revenue +7.3% is too wide to be operational leverage — it is comping over prior-year brand impairments plus genuine productivity capture (network consolidation, automation, reduced complexity in Frito-Lay). This mechanically lifts reported EPS in the next several prints even with flat volume, and supports the recent pattern of 0-4% EPS beats.
m27
Portfolio reshaping toward permissible and functional
Additions in functional soda, protein and better-for-you snacks, plus reformulation and multipack/value architecture in Frito-Lay, address the exact reason share is being lost. These are real revenue lines, but they start small relative to a ~$92B base — they change the mix story faster than they change the growth rate.
m33
Pricing and shelf control as a floor
Direct-store-delivery scale and category-captain status let PepsiCo take low-single-digit price nearly every year and defend distribution. This is why 'all years positive' holds and volatility is only 0.9% — it caps downside more than it creates upside.
Growth risks 5
m64
Documented share loss versus the category
Company recent YoY 2.3% against industry 8.2% — a -5.9pp gap, and category median recent growth of 5.2%. That is the single most damaging datapoint in the brief: the market is expanding and PepsiCo is not capturing it. Share loss of this size is a customer-preference and channel problem, not a promotion problem.
m54
North America salty-snack volume erosion
Frito-Lay volume has been the drag on the consolidated line for several years: value-seeking consumers trading to private label and club packs, plus incremental GLP-1 and health-labeling pressure on high-calorie savory snacking. Growth has been carried by price, and the multi-year earnings CAGR of -4.7% shows price alone no longer converts to profit growth.
m39
Sector cycle turning down
Sector phase reads slowdown with demand score -1, and industry net margins have compressed 2.2pp over three years even as gross margins expanded — i.e. the category is spending the gross-margin gain on promotion and A&M to defend volume. That is the environment where a share loser must reinvest, capping margin upside.
m36
Decelerating quarterly trend beneath the optics
Revenue confidence flags the quarterly trend as decelerating and recent earnings YoY at -14%; the flattering matched-quarter figures rest on soft prior-year comps that fade within roughly two to three quarters.
m20
FX and macro
Macro headwinds with 10y at 4.67% pressure the value-seeking US consumer, while a large international mix makes translated growth swing on currency — a factor management cannot control and which has repeatedly clipped reported growth.
vs expectations: ~6m inline · 1y inline · 2-3y below
The forward growth verdict — is the business itself likely to grow (next 2 quarters / year 1 / years 2–3), judged against its category and against printed expectations. The full horizon ladder + creme renders on the Growth Outlook card above. Not a call on the price (Valuation owns that) or the tape (Sentiment owns that).
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), and Growth Outlook (the forward growth verdict). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Price Prediction
About flat -4.2% v0.6.0 View full prediction →

When we made this prediction on Aug 31, 2026, PEP was $139.85. We expect it to be $134.00 by Mar 2027, and we consider it great value under $115.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 31, 2026.

Price when predicted$139.85
Our estimate for Mar 2027$134.00-4.2%
Great value below$115.00
Price history shown (6 Months)

Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.

Post-Report Due Diligence NOTES
The report is written. This is what its valuation stands on.
Analyzed Oct 6, 2026 · 02:03 1d ago
Read epv-floor ext-gem-composite anchored-pe · FY income statement, balance sheet
1 finding · $0, re-derived on each view

Evidence for a closer look, not a verdict — no score or designation on this page has been changed by it. Items marked material are ones where a conclusion above moves to the other side of the price.

anchored-pe — the "fair value above price" reading turns on 2 inputs NOTE found by sensitivity, not by rule
Published $173.88 vs price $141.07. Nudging `trailing_eps` (down 25%), `adjusted_pe` (down 25%) moves the fair value to the other side of the price. This does not say those inputs are wrong — it says they are where to look first.
trailing_eps flips down 25% adjusted_pe flips down 25%
Price at analysis $141.07. This is where an investigation should start — it is not where one ends. Nothing here was checked against the filings, the tape, or the news; that is the investigator's job.
Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for PEP. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
v1.1.760 · f4b58a28 · 2026-10-07 20:07:48