ETF Comparison
KO vs MCD: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of The Coca-Cola Company and McDonald's Corporation covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Data updated May 20, 2026
Side-by-side snapshot
| KO | MCD | |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | The Coca-Cola Company | McDonald's Corporation |
| Issuer | — | — |
| Last Close | $81.20 as of May 20, 2026 | $282.47 as of May 20, 2026 |
| Distribution yield | 2.51% | 2.57% |
| Expense ratio | — | — |
| AUM | — | — |
| Distribution frequency | Quarterly | Quarterly |
| Underlying index | — | — |
| Objective | Manufactures, distributes, and markets nonalcoholic beverage concentrates, syrups, and finished beverages worldwide. | Operates and franchises McDonald's restaurants serving a locally relevant menu of food and beverages in more than 100 countries worldwide. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | — | — |
| Last dividend | $0.53 | $1.86 |
| Ex-dividend date | 03/13/2026 | 03/03/2026 |
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
Want to go deeper?
Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — no signup required.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Quick verdict
KO (The Coca-Cola Company) and MCD (McDonald's Corporation) are both quarterly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.
MCD offers the higher yield at 2.57% vs 2.51% for KO. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment, KO would generate roughly $20.92/month, while MCD would produce $21.42/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay quarterly distributions.
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, KO would cost approximately $0 in fees vs $0 for MCD (simplified, not compounded). Both charge the same expense ratio.
Strategy & risk
KO tracks — with a dividend approach, while MCD tracks — using a dividend strategy.
Fund details
KO is managed by — (launched —) with — in assets. MCD is managed by — (launched —) with — in assets.
Enjoyed this page?
Do us a favor — if you found this comparison useful, please share it with a friend researching dividend ETFs.
Frequently asked questions
Is KO or MCD better for dividend income?
It depends on your goals. MCD currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.
What is the difference between KO and MCD?
KO (The Coca-Cola Company) tracks — with a dividend strategy, while MCD (McDonald's Corporation) tracks — with a dividend approach. They are issued by — and — respectively.
Can I hold both KO and MCD?
Yes. Many income investors hold both to diversify across different strategies and underlying indexes. This can reduce concentration risk while maintaining a strong income stream.
Which has lower fees, KO or MCD?
KO has an expense ratio of — while MCD charges —. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in KO vs MCD generate?
At current rates, $10,000 in KO would generate roughly $20.92 per month ($251.00 annually). The same in MCD would produce about $21.42 per month ($257.00 annually).
More comparisons to explore
People also compare KO with
Popular comparisons
KO vs MCD — at a glance
Generated April 2026 from current fund data.
Overview
KO and MCD are two mature, blue-chip dividend-paying stocks in the consumer discretionary sector, but they operate in different businesses with different economic models. Coca-Cola manufactures and distributes nonalcoholic beverages globally, while McDonald's operates and franchises quick-service restaurants across 100+ countries. The key distinction: KO derives revenue from product sales and concentrate licensing, while MCD relies on restaurant franchising and royalties—a business model that typically requires less capital and generates steadier cash flows.
How they differ
MCD's franchising model is the single biggest operational difference. About 95% of McDonald's restaurants are franchised, meaning the company collects rent and royalties with minimal direct operating expense. KO, by contrast, manufactures and distributes physical products, which carries higher cost of goods sold and supply-chain complexity. This shows up in yield: KO pays 2.71% versus MCD's 2.37%, reflecting Coca-Cola's slightly higher free cash flow generation relative to its stock price of $75.31 (versus MCD at $306.26). Both pay quarterly dividends, but MCD's last payment of $1.86 per share is larger in absolute terms than KO's $0.53, though both have maintained and grown payouts through economic cycles. On valuation, MCD has moved 12% above its 52-week midpoint, while KO trades closer to its range midpoint, suggesting different investor sentiment about near-term growth.
Who each is best for
KO: Long-term income investors seeking a stable, globally diversified beverage exposure with a modest yield bump; works well in tax-advantaged retirement accounts where the modest 2.71% yield can compound for decades without triggering annual tax drag.
MCD: Investors prioritizing predictable, recession-resistant cash flows from the franchising model; ideal for those who value exposure to pricing power (franchisees absorb food costs) and want a lower-yield but arguably more durable business model.
Key risks to know
- Commodity exposure (KO): Coca-Cola is sensitive to sugar, corn, and packaging material costs, as well as currency fluctuations in emerging markets where it derives significant revenue. MCD faces less direct commodity risk because franchisees absorb ingredient costs.
- Traffic and consumer spending (MCD): McDonald's depends on consistent restaurant traffic and consumer discretionary spending. Economic slowdowns or shifting food preferences can pressure same-store sales and franchise viability. KO faces similar category-level risk (beverage consumption shifts) but has more geographic and product diversity to offset it.
- Valuation gap: MCD has appreciated 12% from its 52-week midpoint; KO has not. Reverting to historical valuations could pressure MCD's price, while KO may have more upside if sentiment improves.
- Dividend sustainability: Both companies have fortress balance sheets, but KO's slightly higher yield means less margin for error if cash generation slows. Neither faces imminent risk, but KO should be monitored if operating margins compress.
Bottom line
If you prioritize yield and want exposure to a diversified global asset with modest inflation pricing power, KO's 2.71% payout stands out. If you value a capital-light, franchising-driven business model with stickier cash flows and less commodity risk, MCD's lower yield reflects a more defensive posture. Both are quality dividend stocks; the choice hinges on whether you prefer product manufacturing or asset-light franchising, and your tolerance for commodity sensitivity. Past performance doesn't predict future results.
AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.
Model these ETFs in your own portfolio
Start a free Dividend Vision account to project monthly income, track overlap across holdings, and compare these funds against anything else in your portfolio.