C
CorpDigest
CompaniesIndustriesCompareBlogAbout
Search companiesSearchKContact
Content is for informational purposes only. Not financial advice. Data sourced from SEC filings, annual reports, and public records. See our full disclaimer and methodology.
C
CorpDigest

Structured business intelligence for strategic research. Track 409 verified company profiles.

Strategic Resources

  • Full Directory
  • Compare Tools
  • About Mission
  • Founder Profile
  • Data Sources
  • Editorial Policy
  • Contact Desk
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Disclaimer
  • Sitemap
  • Home Base

Strategic Analyses

  • Apple vs Microsoft
  • Amazon vs Walmart
  • Google vs Meta
  • Netflix vs Spotify
  • Tesla vs Toyota
  • Nike vs Adidas
  • Coca-Cola vs PepsiCo
  • JPMorgan vs Bank of America
  • Visa vs Mastercard
  • Airbnb vs Marriott
  • Intel vs Nvidia
  • Uber vs Lyft
  • Disney vs Warner Bros
  • Salesforce vs ServiceNow
  • IBM vs Accenture
  • Boeing vs Airbus

© 2026 CorpDigest. Independent business research.

HomeComparePepsiCo, Inc. vs Wells Fargo & Company

PepsiCo, Inc. vs Wells Fargo & Company: Strategic Comparison

Comparison last reviewed: July 17, 2026Verified by CorpDigest Research DeskData sources: SEC EDGAR, Financial Statements
Side-by-Side Analysis

Key Differences at a Glance

FieldPepsiCo, Inc.Wells Fargo & Company
Revenue$93.9B$83.7B
Founded19651852
Employees318,000226,000
Market Cap$205.0B$220.0B
HeadquartersUnited StatesUSA
View PepsiCo, Inc. Full Profile →View Wells Fargo & Company Full Profile →
PepsiCo, Inc. Financials →Wells Fargo & Company Financials →PepsiCo, Inc. Strategy →Wells Fargo & Company Strategy →

Quick Stats Comparison

MetricPepsiCo, Inc.Wells Fargo & Company
Revenue$93.9B$83.7B
Founded19651852
HeadquartersPurchase, New YorkSan Francisco, California, USA
Market Cap$205.0B$220.0B
Employees318,000226,000

PepsiCo, Inc. Revenue vs Wells Fargo & Company Revenue — Year by Year

YearPepsiCo, Inc.Wells Fargo & CompanyLeader
2025$93.9B$83.7BPepsiCo, Inc.
2024$91.9B$82.3BPepsiCo, Inc.
2023$91.5B$82.6BPepsiCo, Inc.
2022$86.4B$73.8BPepsiCo, Inc.
2021$79.5B$78.5BPepsiCo, Inc.

Business Model Breakdown

Overview: PepsiCo, Inc. vs Wells Fargo & Company

This in-depth comparison examines PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company across revenue, market value, business model, competitive positioning, and long-term growth strategy. Whether you are researching PepsiCo, Inc. on its own, evaluating Wells Fargo & Company, or weighing the two companies side by side, the breakdown below highlights where each company leads and where the gap between PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company is widest.

On the headline numbers, PepsiCo, Inc. reports annual revenue of $93.9B against $83.7B for Wells Fargo & Company, while their respective market capitalizations stand at $205.0B and $220.0B. PepsiCo, Inc. is headquartered in United States and Wells Fargo & Company operates from USA, and those different home markets shape how each company competes.

PepsiCo, Inc.: Frito-Lay is the most profitable snack food business on earth, and it lives inside a company most people still think of as a cola brand. PepsiCo's $93.9 billion in fiscal year 2025 revenue spans Lay's, Doritos, Cheetos, Tostitos, Quaker, Gatorade, Mountain Dew, and the flagship Pepsi-Cola across 200-plus countries. The cola is the logo on the jersey. The chips are the business. The 1965 merger of Pepsi-Cola and Frito-Lay that created PepsiCo was not, in retrospect, a diversification move — it was a recognition that salty snacks and sweet beverages occupy the same consumption occasion, reach the same consumer, and move through the same distribution infrastructure. Frito-Lay now generates roughly 27% of consolidated revenue at operating margins that reportedly exceed 30%. The beverage segment is larger by revenue but carries margins a fraction of that. Ramon Laguarta, CEO since 2018, has managed this asymmetry while navigating input cost inflation across 318,000 employees. The $93.9 billion revenue base grew from $86.4 billion in 2022, steady rather than spectacular. The 2025 acquisitions of Siete Foods and Poppi moved PepsiCo toward better-for-you snacks and functional beverages — categories where younger consumers are shifting spend. Those deals are bets on where the market is moving, not reactions to where it already arrived. Tropicana was divested in 2022. SodaStream was acquired in 2018 for $3.2 billion and has become a platform for carbonated beverage consumption at home. Rockstar Energy joined the portfolio in 2020. Each of these moves has been about defending shelf presence and consumer attention against private label pressure from Kirkland, Great Value, and every other store brand that has learned the unit economics of snack foods.

Wells Fargo & Company: The Federal Reserve has never imposed a balance sheet cap on a major American bank as a punitive measure — until Wells Fargo. The 2018 asset cap, restricting total assets to the level at which they stood at year-end 2017 (approximately $1.95 trillion), was an unprecedented sanction that has cost the bank an estimated $3 billion-plus annually in foregone revenue. No other major U.S. Bank has faced this constraint in over a century of Federal Reserve history. The cap emerged from the fake-accounts scandal that became public in 2016: 3.5 million unauthorized accounts opened over 14 years, driven by internal cross-selling sales quotas that employees faced daily. Internal auditors had identified the practice as early as 2004 — twelve years before the public revelation. The board received cross-selling metrics quarterly throughout that period, the same metrics producing the fraud also producing positive headline numbers. Wells Fargo holds approximately $1.9 trillion in assets and serves over 69 million customers — roughly one in three American households — through retail banking, commercial banking, wealth management, and investment banking. The $83.7 billion in 2025 revenue and $21.3 billion in net income demonstrate that the underlying business remains among the most valuable banking franchises in the country, constrained rather than destroyed. The cap's removal — expected somewhere in the 2025-2027 window — would unlock an estimated $2-4 billion in additional annual net income at full run-rate, representing 10-20 percent earnings growth from a single regulatory event. That potential explains why Wells Fargo stock has traded at a persistent discount to peers and why cap removal represents the single largest near-term earnings catalyst in U.S. Banking.

Business Models: How PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company Make Money

PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company pursue distinct approaches to generating revenue, and understanding how each company operates is the foundation of any fair comparison between PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company.

PepsiCo, Inc. business model: Revenue model: PepsiCo earns revenue from branded snacks, beverages, concentrates, direct-store delivery, foodservice, and international packaged-food operations. It licenses its brand to bottlers and collects royalties. PepsiCo still sells that consumer Doritos at the checkout. That's the signature of a company absorbing impairment charges, commodity inflation, and the cost of strategic price cuts simultaneously. That's pricing power made manifest. They're the result of deliberate price cuts on Doritos and Lay's restoring volume growth that pricing aggression had destroyed.

Wells Fargo & Company business model: Additional settlements followed: the CFPB's $3.7 billion settlement in December 2022, covering auto loan insurance abuses and mortgage fee overcharges, was the largest in CFPB history at the time. **Net Interest Income (NII)** is the difference between the interest Wells Fargo earns on its assets (loans, securities, and other interest-earning assets) and the interest it pays on its liabilities (deposits, borrowings, and other interest-bearing liabilities). **Noninterest Income** contributes approximately 40 – 45% of net revenue and encompasses a diverse set of fee-based revenue streams. The most important are: (1) Wealth and Investment Management fees — fee income from Wells Fargo Advisors, Private Bank, and Abbot Downing, tied to approximately $2.2 trillion in client assets and generating stable revenue across market cycles; (2) Mortgage banking income — origination fees, gain-on-sale income, and servicing fees from the residential mortgage portfolio, which was historically Wells Fargo's largest single business before regulatory constraints and rate environment pressures reduced its prominence; (3) Card and transaction fees — interchange, annual, and transaction fees from consumer and commercial card products serving tens of millions of accounts; (4) Investment banking and trading — advisory fees, underwriting commissions, and trading revenue from the Corporate and Investment Banking segment, which is constrained by the asset cap's impact on balance sheet-intensive businesses like leveraged lending; and (5) Service charges and other fees — account service fees, wire transfer fees, and miscellaneous consumer banking charges. As interest rates stabilized and deposit repricing caught up with asset yields in 2024, NII moderated toward $47 billion, causing total net revenue to dip slightly year-over-year despite growth in fee income. Wells Fargo's conduct failures were not confined to the retail fake-accounts scandal: the CFPB's 2022 $3.7 billion settlement, the largest in the agency's history, covered auto loan insurance charges (forced-place insurance on borrowers who already had coverage), mortgage fee overcharges, and deposit account freezes that harmed millions of customers. The middle-market commercial banking business also tends to generate superior returns on equity relative to consumer banking, because the average middle-market loan balance is large, the customer is financially sophisticated enough to represent lower operational support costs, and the treasury management fee streams are recurring and inflation-adjusting. Without cap removal — if the Federal Reserve determines that governance remediation is incomplete and delays lifting the order — Wells Fargo's financial trajectory is more modest: steady but unspectacular earnings improvement driven by expense reduction, wealth management fee growth, and credit card portfolio expansion within existing constraints.

Competitive Advantage: PepsiCo, Inc. vs Wells Fargo & Company

The durability of a company's moat often decides long-term winners. Here is how the competitive advantages of PepsiCo, Inc. stack up against those of Wells Fargo & Company.

PepsiCo, Inc. competitive advantage: Competitive position: PepsiCo's advantage is its snacks-and-beverages portfolio, Frito-Lay scale, distribution reach, brand portfolio, and retailer relationships. That bundling power is the competitive moat that matters most, and it shapes every rivalry differently. Coca-Cola's concentrate model produces operating margins above 30% because it doesn't own trucks or run manufacturing plants at PepsiCo's scale. Not a network effect. Not a switching cost in the traditional tech sense. Is the advantage weakening? Bet one: acquired brands can scale without dying. Frito-Lay had operational discipline, manufacturing scale, and a distribution network that touched every grocery store, convenience store, and gas station in America. Integrating them required PepsiCo to let each side preserve its strengths while the corporate parent pursued scale.

Wells Fargo & Company competitive advantage: Wells Fargo's CIB has been unable to fully compete with JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley in balance-sheet-intensive advisory and capital markets mandates — a competitive disadvantage that reverses automatically once the asset cap is lifted. Whether that restoration succeeds — whether Wells Fargo can rebuild trust with the 69 million customers it retained through the scandal, recruit the younger customers it has been losing, and eventually deploy its franchise advantages at full capacity once the Federal Reserve asset cap lifts — is the question that will determine whether Wells Fargo's second century looks more like its first or like a long managed decline. But it cannot fully use any of these advantages while the Federal Reserve asset cap limits balance sheet deployment. Wells Fargo's challenges divide into three categories: regulatory constraints that are slowly resolving, competitive disadvantages that compound with each passing year, and cultural transformation that requires sustained organizational discipline that management-by-management-turnover typically erodes. Bank of America's Erica virtual assistant has accumulated 50+ million users and processes billions of queries, representing genuine artificial intelligence capability deployed at consumer banking scale. Wells Fargo's most durable competitive advantages are its physical distribution network, its middle-market commercial banking relationships, and the latent earnings power that will be unlocked by Federal Reserve asset cap removal.

Growth Strategy: Where PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company Are Headed

Future prospects matter as much as current results. The growth strategies below explain how PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company each plan to expand from here.

PepsiCo, Inc. growth strategy: It's whether a company built on chips and cola can convince regulators, consumers, and now an activist investor that it belongs in the next decade of food. PepsiCo Beverages North America brings in about 28% — Pepsi, Mountain Dew, Gatorade, Starry, Bubly, the Starbucks ready-to-drink partnership, and now Poppi. Direct-store delivery means PepsiCo employees — not retailer employees — stock shelves, build end-cap displays, rotate product for freshness, and manage inventory at the store level. Strategic direction: PepsiCo is focused on convenient foods, zero-sugar beverages, international growth, productivity programs, and portfolio renovation toward permissible indulgence and health trends. Translation: PepsiCo decided it's better at moving cans than building energy brands. PepsiCo's role is logistics partner — profitable, but not where category leadership lives. BodyArmor (Coca-Cola owned), Prime Hydration, Liquid IV, and a wave of DTC electrolyte brands captured younger consumers through social media and influencer partnerships rather than sideline placement. Management chose to cut prices on flagship snacks to restore volume growth — and it worked. That pressure arrives at exactly the wrong moment: PepsiCo is simultaneously trying to restore volume growth through price cuts on Doritos and Lay's. Retailer investment in private-label quality is a one-way ratchet. And currency — 42% of revenue comes from international markets where the dollar's strength can wipe out real growth overnight. PepsiCo's growth story right now comes down to two bets and a math problem. Pepsi Zero Sugar has outpaced regular Pepsi in growth for three consecutive years. Mountain Dew Zero, Gatorade Zero, and functional hydration products are all growing faster than their full-sugar siblings. The zero-sugar category now represents over 30% of carbonated soft drink growth in North America. Q1 2026 showed the correction working — North America food volumes returned to positive growth after strategic price cuts on Doritos and Lay's. If PepsiCo delivers Frito-Lay North America organic volume growth through FY2026 with operating margins above 28%, Elliott takes its gains and moves on. Its growth didn't require outspending Coca-Cola on advertising. The 1997 spin-off into what became Yum Brands marked a return to focus: packaged foods, beverages, brands, and distribution.

Wells Fargo & Company growth strategy: The problem was not finding gold — thousands of miners were finding it — but converting raw gold dust into usable currency, moving that currency safely to where it could be spent or invested, and communicating between California and the East within weeks rather than months. The corporate and investment banking operation, though constrained by regulatory limitations, is a meaningful force in U.S. Capital markets. The Federal Reserve's rate hiking cycle of 2022 – 2023 expanded Wells Fargo's net interest margin (the percentage spread between earning asset yields and funding costs) significantly, as the bank's variable-rate assets repriced upward faster than its deposit costs increased. **Corporate and Investment Banking** (CIB) handles large-cap corporate clients, capital markets transactions, M&A advisory, institutional sales and trading, and structured finance. This is the segment most visibly constrained by the Federal Reserve asset cap: investment banks compete partly on the size of their balance sheets, which affects their ability to underwrite large leveraged loans, hold inventory for market-making, or provide bridge financing in M&A transactions. The corruption of that model — the transformation of a customer-service philosophy into a sales quota machine — was a failure of governance, not a failure of the underlying strategy. JPMorgan's consumer bank has consistently outgrown Wells Fargo in new deposit account openings since 2016, partly by deploying branch expansion and marketing into markets where the Wells Fargo brand had been damaged by the scandal. JPMorgan's investment bank has captured advisory and lending mandates that Wells Fargo's balance sheet-constrained CIB could not match. Bank of America offers a different competitive comparison — a bank that also had significant post-crisis regulatory challenges but executed its remediation more successfully and earlier, now competing on the strength of its Merrill Lynch wealth management franchise, the Erica AI assistant (50+ million users), and a technology investment that has been more consistent than Wells Fargo's. With cap removal, Wells Fargo can grow its loan portfolio proportionally to its deposit base, deploy balance sheet in investment banking mandates it currently cannot take, and accelerate the return of capital through buybacks at a rate that currently constrained growth investment doesn't allow. Scharf's stated target is a sub-60% efficiency ratio, achievable through ongoing expense reduction and (more importantly) revenue growth once the asset cap is removed. Wells Fargo's technology investment was constrained during the 2016 – 2022 period when management attention and capital were consumed by regulatory remediation. The resulting gap in digital product quality — mobile banking features, small business banking tools, automated investing capabilities, and AI-powered customer service — is visible in J.D. Power customer satisfaction rankings and in new account opening data. Closing the technology gap requires sustained investment without the distraction of new regulatory actions — a virtuous cycle that depends on successfully completing the consent order remediation. The physical branch network — 4,500+ branches concentrated in high-growth Sun Belt (California, Texas, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado), Pacific Coast, and Mountain West markets — represents decades of site selection, real estate acquisition, and relationship-building that digital-only competitors cannot replicate cost-effectively or quickly. The branch network provides Wells Fargo with a customer acquisition and retention infrastructure that pure digital banks are spending billions trying to partially replicate through embedded finance partnerships and retail co-locations. Additionally, the geographic concentration in Sun Belt markets is a structural tailwind: these are among the fastest-growing population and economic regions in the United States, meaning the existing branch infrastructure serves an expanding addressable market without requiring proportional new investment. Wells Fargo's growth strategy under CEO Scharf is organized around a sequenced set of priorities that reflect the reality of operating under regulatory constraints. The third priority — revenue growth — is partly deferred by the asset cap but partly achievable within current constraints through improving product capabilities and increasing cross-sell in appropriate, customer-needs-driven ways. The Wealth and Investment Management segment can grow by recruiting financial advisors, expanding the Private Bank client base, and deepening investment product relationships with existing commercial banking clients. The credit card business can grow without significant balance sheet expansion by improving digital acquisition and increasing usage among the existing deposit customer base. International banking and capital markets advisory can grow within existing balance sheet limits by being more selective about which relationships to serve. The bank's loan-to-deposit ratio is substantially below peers because the asset cap has prevented loan growth proportional to deposit growth. The investment banking franchise can compete for balance-sheet-intensive mandates it currently declines. Beyond the cap, the medium-term outlook depends on interest rates (which drive NII), credit quality (which was exceptional in 2021 – 2024 but may normalize if the economy slows), and the pace of technology investment's impact on customer satisfaction and retention. Henry Wells and William Fargo did not intend to build a bank. But American Express's board declined to expand to California. Wells Fargo acquired those routes in 1866 after the transcontinental telegraph made the Pony Express obsolete, consolidating its dominance of western express service.

Financial Picture: PepsiCo, Inc. vs Wells Fargo & Company

A closer look at the financial trajectory of PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company rounds out the comparison.

PepsiCo, Inc.: Revenue of $93.9 billion in fiscal year 2025 means PepsiCo is the second-largest food and beverage company in the world by revenue. Net income of $8.24 billion on that base reflects a business generating real earnings, not just scale. Market capitalization of $205 billion implies investors are pricing a business with durable pricing power and category leadership. The trajectory over four years — $86.4 billion in 2022, $91.5 billion in 2023, $91.9 billion in 2024, $93.9 billion in 2025 — shows consistent growth but decelerating momentum. The company has used pricing to offset volume pressure during inflationary periods, a standard CPG playbook that works until consumers start trading down to store brands at scale. Frito-Lay's structural advantage is the key to the financial story. Thirty-plus percent operating margins on a segment generating roughly $25 billion in revenue produces profit dollars that fund the entire enterprise's investment capacity. When those margins compress — whether from input costs, private label pressure, or consumer shifts toward better-for-you alternatives — the financial architecture shows the strain. The Siete Foods acquisition in 2025 signals a willingness to pay for growth in premium, better-for-you snack categories where Frito-Lay's core brands have less natural adjacency. Poppi, the prebiotic soda acquisition also completed in 2025, positions PepsiCo in functional beverages where volume is growing and traditional cola brands have limited credibility. Both deals cost capital that will take years to earn back, but both address the same question: what does the snack and beverage portfolio look like when the next generation of consumers defines what they want?

Wells Fargo & Company: Wells Fargo reported $83.7 billion in 2025 total revenue and $21.3 billion in net income, up from $83.7B and $21.3 billion in 2024. The 2025 result matters because the Federal Reserve lifted the asset cap in June 2025, removing a major growth constraint that had shaped the bank's strategy since 2018. The core financial question is whether Wells Fargo can convert its cleaner risk-and-control profile into sustainable balance-sheet growth without giving back expense discipline. Net interest income stayed stable, noninterest income improved, and the bank's return profile strengthened, but future upside depends on deposit growth, loan demand, fee income, credit quality, and execution under Charles Scharf.

Company-Specific SWOT Notes

PepsiCo, Inc.

Strength

Competitive position: PepsiCo's advantage is its snacks-and-beverages portfolio, Frito-Lay scale, distribution reach, brand portfolio, and retailer relationships.

Strength

PepsiCo's advantage is its snacks-and-beverages portfolio, Frito-Lay scale, distribution reach, brand portfolio, and retailer relationships.

Weakness

The main exposures are commodity inflation, health regulation, private-label competition, currency movements, and changing consumer preferences.

Opportunity

It's whether a company built on chips and cola can convince regulators, consumers, and now an activist investor that it belongs in the next decade of food.

Wells Fargo & Company

Strength

Wells Fargo's 4,500+ branches are concentrated in Sun Belt, Pacific Coast, and Mountain West markets — among the fastest-growing U.

Strength

Wells Fargo's CIB has been unable to fully compete with JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley in balance-sheet-intensive advisory and capital markets mandates — a competitive disadvantage that reverses automatically once the asset

Weakness

The 2018 consent order restricting total assets to approximately $1.

Opportunity

Wells Fargo's Federal Reserve asset cap removal is arguably the largest near-term earnings catalyst of any major U.

Threat

The most significant near-term threat is regulatory recidivism: another material conduct finding from the CFPB, OCC, Federal Reserve, or state regulators that resets the remediation timeline and delays cap removal.

Head-to-Head Scorecard

CategoryWinnerWhy
Revenue ScalePepsiCo, Inc.PepsiCo, Inc. reports the larger revenue base ($93.9B), which serves as a core operational scale signal.
Profitability PotentialComparableBoth organizations prioritize market penetration or are at equivalent reporting tiers.
Company AgeWells Fargo & CompanyFounded in 1965 vs 1852. The earlier pioneer typically commands longer historical institutional legacy.
Innovation MoatPepsiCo, Inc.Higher aggregate count of major acquisitions and key R&D releases indicates a more active technology absorption velocity.
Scale (Employees)PepsiCo, Inc.A significantly larger reported workforce supports enhanced global distribution capability.
Market CapWells Fargo & CompanyHigher public valuation denotes greater forward-looking investor conviction in earnings potential.
Future OutlookTiedStrategic auditing assesses that both maintain defensive leadership vectors within their core market clusters.

Who Wins Each Category?

Revenue Scale
PepsiCo, Inc.

PepsiCo, Inc. reports the larger revenue base ($93.9B), which serves as a core operational scale signal.

Profitability Potential
Comparable

Both organizations prioritize market penetration or are at equivalent reporting tiers.

Company Age
Wells Fargo & Company

Founded in 1965 vs 1852. The earlier pioneer typically commands longer historical institutional legacy.

Innovation Moat
PepsiCo, Inc.

Higher aggregate count of major acquisitions and key R&D releases indicates a more active technology absorption velocity.

Scale (Employees)
PepsiCo, Inc.

A significantly larger reported workforce supports enhanced global distribution capability.

Verdict

Who Wins: PepsiCo, Inc. or Wells Fargo & Company?

Verdict: Between PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company, PepsiCo, Inc. is the stronger overall option based on higher annual revenue. The decision still depends on which factors matter most for your needs, but on the weight of the evidence above, PepsiCo, Inc. comes out ahead in this PepsiCo, Inc. vs Wells Fargo & Company comparison.
→ Read the full PepsiCo, Inc. profile→ Read the full Wells Fargo & Company profile

Reviewed by Swet Parvadiya, May 2026 - Author Profile

Swet Parvadiya

| Strategic Audit Verified

Our analysts compile business strategy profiles from public financial filings, press releases, and analyst reports. Each profile is reviewed for accuracy before publication by our editorial desk and updated on a rolling basis.

About the Author →Our Methodology →

Frequently Asked Questions: PepsiCo, Inc. vs Wells Fargo & Company

Is PepsiCo, Inc. better than Wells Fargo & Company?

Verdict: Between PepsiCo, Inc. and Wells Fargo & Company, PepsiCo, Inc. is the stronger overall option based on higher annual revenue. The decision still depends on which factors matter most for your needs, but on the weight of the evidence above, PepsiCo, Inc. comes out ahead in this PepsiCo, Inc. vs Wells Fargo & Company comparison.

Who earns more — PepsiCo, Inc. or Wells Fargo & Company?

PepsiCo, Inc. earns more with $93.9B in annual revenue versus Wells Fargo & Company's $83.7B. PepsiCo, Inc. leads on total revenue based on latest verified figures.

Which company has higher revenue — PepsiCo, Inc. or Wells Fargo & Company?

PepsiCo, Inc. reported $93.9B, while Wells Fargo & Company reported $83.7B. The revenue leader is PepsiCo, Inc. based on latest verified figures.

PepsiCo, Inc. revenue vs Wells Fargo & Company revenue — which is higher?

PepsiCo, Inc. revenue: $93.9B. Wells Fargo & Company revenue: $83.7B. PepsiCo, Inc. has the larger revenue base of the two companies.

Sources & References

  • SEC EDGAR: PepsiCo, Inc. Annual Filings (10-K, 8-K)
  • PepsiCo, Inc. Corporate Website
  • PepsiCo, Inc. Annual Report 2025 - Revenue and Financial Data
  • sec.gov
  • investors.pepsico.com
  • pepsico.com
  • pepsico.com
  • pepsico.com
  • britannica
  • investors.pepsico.com
  • pepsico
  • data.sec.gov
  • sec.gov
  • investors.pepsico.com
  • britannica.com
  • pepsico.com
  • SEC EDGAR: Wells Fargo & Company Annual Filings (10-K, 8-K)
  • Wells Fargo & Company Corporate Website
  • Wells Fargo & Company Annual Report 2025 - Revenue and Financial Data
  • sec.gov
  • wellsfargo.com
  • federalreserve.gov
  • consumerfinance.gov
  • newsroom.wf.com

Curated Comparisons