ETF Comparison
PEP vs PG: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of PepsiCo, Inc. and The Procter & Gamble Company covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Data updated July 4, 2026
Side-by-side snapshot
| PEP | PG | |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | PepsiCo, Inc. | The Procter & Gamble Company |
| Issuer | — | — |
| Last Close | $144.22 as of July 4, 2026 | $151.41 as of July 4, 2026 |
| Distribution yield | 4.03% | 2.87% |
| Distribution Safety Score | 100 | 100 |
| Expense ratio | — | — |
| AUM | — | — |
| Distribution frequency | Quarterly | Quarterly |
| Underlying index | — | — |
| Objective | Manufactures, markets, distributes, and sells beverages and convenient foods worldwide under brands including Pepsi, Lay's, Gatorade, and Quaker. | Provides branded consumer packaged goods including beauty, grooming, health care, fabric care, and home care products worldwide. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | N/A | N/A |
| Beta | 0.359 | 0.385 |
| Last dividend | $1.4800 | $1.0890 |
| Ex-dividend date | 06/05/2026 | 04/24/2026 |
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.
Total returns
PEP has outpaced PG over the trailing twelve months, posting a 9.69% total return against -3.38%. The picture flips over 10 years, though — PG has compounded at 8.90% a year, ahead of PEP at 6.26%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | 10Y | Since Jun 1972 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEP | 2.31% | 9.69% | -5.14% | 2.44% | 6.26% | 11.64% | 19.8% | -0.50 | -0.69 | -29.2% |
| PG | 8.35% | -3.38% | 2.39% | 4.92% | 8.90% | 10.53% | 17.6% | -0.12 | -0.16 | -21.1% |
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date, split-adjusted, as of July 2, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative; longer windows are annualized. “Since Jun 1972” measures every fund from June 1, 1972 — the youngest fund's first trading day — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.
Quick verdict
PEP (PepsiCo, Inc.) and PG (The Procter & Gamble Company) are both quarterly-pay stocks, but they take different approaches.
PEP offers the higher yield at 4.03% vs 2.87% for PG. 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, PEP would generate roughly $33.58/month, while PG would produce $23.92/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay quarterly distributions.
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, PEP would cost approximately $0 in fees vs $0 for PG (simplified, not compounded). Both charge the same expense ratio.
Strategy & risk
PEP is a stock, while PG is a stock. Beta is 0.359 for PEP and 0.385 for PG, indicating PEP is less volatile relative to the market.
Fund details
PEP is managed by — (launched 06/01/1972) with — in assets. PG is managed by — (launched 01/02/1962) 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 PEP or PG better for dividend income?
It depends on your goals. PEP 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 PEP and PG?
PEP (PepsiCo, Inc.) is a stock, while PG (The Procter & Gamble Company) is a stock. They are issued by — and — respectively.
Can I hold both PEP and PG?
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, PEP or PG?
PEP has an expense ratio of — while PG charges —. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in PEP vs PG generate?
At current rates, $10,000 in PEP would generate roughly $33.58 per month ($403.00 annually). The same in PG would produce about $23.92 per month ($287.00 annually).
Which has performed better historically, PEP or PG?
PEP has outpaced PG over the trailing twelve months, posting a 9.69% total return against -3.38%. The picture flips over 10 years, though — PG has compounded at 8.90% a year, ahead of PEP at 6.26%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare PEP with
Popular comparisons
PEP vs PG — at a glance
Generated June 2026 from current fund data.
Overview
PepsiCo (PEP) and Procter & Gamble (PG) are both defensive consumer staples stocks with long dividend histories, but they differ fundamentally in their underlying business mix and yield generation. PEP derives revenue from beverages and convenient foods (snacks, sports drinks, breakfast products); PG manufactures personal care, home care, and health care products. The most visible difference is yield: PEP offers a 4.00% distribution rate versus PG's 2.78%, reflecting different capital allocation priorities and growth profiles.
How they differ
PEP's higher yield stems primarily from a larger payout ratio relative to earnings—the beverage and snack business generates steady cash flows that support the 4% distribution. PG takes a more conservative dividend approach, returning less of its earnings to shareholders while retaining capital for acquisitions and share repurchases; this lower yield reflects PG's longer operational history (inception 1962 vs. 1972) and more diversified portfolio of personal care brands. Both trade with defensive betas below 0.4 (PEP at 0.359, PG at 0.385), but PG's slightly higher beta suggests marginally more sensitivity to economic cycles—likely due to exposure to discretionary beauty and grooming categories. Neither fund carries leverage or alternatives; both are straightforward equity holdings in mature, globally diversified consumer companies.
Who each is best for
PEP: Fits investors who prioritize current income from a single dividend-paying equity holding and can tolerate concentration in the beverages and snacks sector. Works well for those seeking higher yield than broad-market indices while maintaining low volatility.
PG: Designed for investors who favor slower, steadier dividend growth over immediate yield and want broader exposure to consumer staples across personal care, home care, and health segments. Aligns with long-term, total-return-focused allocations where lower cash distributions are reinvested for compounding.
Key risks to know
- Sector concentration: PEP's exposure is narrowed to beverages and convenient foods, whereas PG spans multiple consumer categories (beauty, grooming, fabric care, home care, health care). A commodity-driven spike in sugar, packaging, or agricultural inputs could disproportionately pressure PEP margins.
- Yield sustainability: PEP's 4.00% distribution rate is substantially higher than PG's 2.78%, leaving less margin for earnings shortfalls before the dividend faces pressure. Any slowdown in volume growth or pricing power in snacks or soft drinks could constrain the payout.
- Currency and emerging-market exposure: Both companies derive significant revenue overseas, exposing them to foreign exchange headwinds and geopolitical disruption. PEP's brand-focused business may be slightly more insulated from local-currency devaluation than PG's commodity-linked product mix.
- Consumer preference shifts: Secular trends toward lower-sugar beverages and natural or premium personal care products create structural headwinds for both, though PEP's exposure to legacy carbonated soft drinks may be more acute.
Bottom line
If you value a higher current yield and can accept narrower sector exposure, PEP's 4.00% distribution stands out; if you prefer lower yield paired with broader diversification and a longer track record of disciplined capital management, PG's 2.78% payout and multi-category footprint align better. Both are defensive, low-volatility holdings in companies with durable brand power, but they serve different income and growth objectives. Past performance does not guarantee 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.