ABEV vs. MKC.V: Ambev vs. McCormick Stock Comparison

Company Profile

Ambev (ABEV) and McCormick (MKC.V) both fall under the Food, Beverage & Tobacco industry group, but ABEV is classified in Beverages while MKC.V is classified in Food Products.

McCormick (MKC.V) trades as ordinary local shares, while Ambev (ABEV) trades as an ADR — compare with FX exposure, depositary-program fees, and dividend-withholding-tax differences in mind.

Price Performance

Cumulative Growth

Trailing Returns

Calendar-Year Returns

Performance Metrics

Risk Profile

Drawdown History

Return Distribution

Risk Metrics

Ambev (ABEV) is heavily traded at around 26.44M shares per day, whereas McCormick (MKC.V) is thinly traded at only 10.12K — larger orders in the latter may face more price impact or wider spreads, depending on market conditions.

Risk-Adjusted Performance

Risk-Return Positioning

Risk-Adjusted Metrics

Profitability

Both Ambev (ABEV) at 17.65% and McCormick (MKC.V) at 22.62% sit in the top peer quartile for ROE, suggesting each generates more profit from shareholders’ equity than typical industry peers.

For every dollar of sales, both Ambev (ABEV) at 17.69% and McCormick (MKC.V) at 19.39% retain more as net profit than most peers, landing in the top net margin quartile of their industries.

Both Ambev (ABEV) at 25.56% and McCormick (MKC.V) at 17.76% convert sales into operating profit at a top-quartile rate, pointing to tighter cost discipline before financing and tax.

Profitability Metrics

Growth

McCormick (MKC.V) at 1.73% is around its peer norm for revenue growth, while Ambev (ABEV) at -1.35% drops into the bottom quartile, signaling weaker demand or pricing momentum.

Both Ambev (ABEV) at 2.20% and McCormick (MKC.V) at 0.34% land near their industries' usual EPS growth ranges, so bottom-line momentum looks broadly in line with peers on both sides.

Growth Metrics

Financial Strength

Ambev (ABEV) at 1.06 keeps current ratio within its industry’s typical mid-range, while McCormick (MKC.V) at 0.66 runs in the tighter-liquidity quartile — a thinner cushion against current liabilities for MKC.V.

Ambev (ABEV) at 0.03 keeps leverage in the lower industry quartile, while McCormick (MKC.V) at 0.66 runs a more typical debt-to-equity mix.

Financial Strength Metrics

Dividends

McCormick (MKC.V) at 3.77% pays an industry-typical yield; Ambev (ABEV) at 9.64% is above its entire peer range — the higher number, but one that calls for a look at payout sustainability before treating it as an advantage.

Both Ambev (ABEV) at 74.21% and McCormick (MKC.V) at 34.18% keep payout ratio within their industries’ typical mid-ranges — dividend policies that share earnings without consuming too much of them.

Dividend Metrics

Valuation

McCormick (MKC.V) at 8.82 sits in the cheaper P/E ratio quartile, while Ambev (ABEV) at 14.68 is closer to its industry’s usual earnings multiple — a discount for MKC.V, though growth and earnings durability still matter.

Ambev (ABEV) at 0.48 sits in the cheaper P/S ratio quartile while McCormick (MKC.V) at 1.71 prices around its industry’s middle — ABEV costs less per dollar of sales, though read it alongside growth and margins.

On P/B ratio, both Ambev (ABEV) at 2.38 and McCormick (MKC.V) at 1.87 are valued close to their industries’ norm against book — neither stands out from peers.

Valuation Metrics