Computed head-to-head · 6 dimensions
COST vs PG
Costco Wholesale Corporation versus The Procter & Gamble Company — yield, safety, growth trend, cost, scale, and tax treatment.
COST and PG are evenly matched (2–2 across six dimensions) — the right pick comes down to which dimension you weight most.
Neither COST nor PG wins outright — the two are nearly equivalent across all 6 dimensions, making the choice largely a matter of which account you hold them in and personal preference on yield vs stability. COST and PG are evenly matched (2–2 across six dimensions) — the right pick comes down to which dimension you weight most.
On yield alone, PG generates 3.05% vs 0.56% — a 2.49% difference that translates to $2,490 more per year on a $100,000 investment. On dividend safety, COST scores 8.3/10 (Strong) vs 7.0/10 (Solid) for PG — investors prioritizing income reliability should weight that gap alongside the yield difference.
Scorecard at a glance
| Dimension | COST | PG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yield | 0.56% | 3.05% | PG wins |
| Dividend safety | 8.3/10 | 7.0/10 | COST wins |
| Growth trend | -0.04% vs 5y | +0.55% vs 5y | COST wins |
| Volatility (beta) | 0.91 | 0.38 | PG wins |
| Scale | $465.4B | $332.3B | Tie |
| Tax efficiency | Qualified-eligible | Qualified-eligible | Tie |
| Overall | 2 wins | 2 wins | Tie |
Dimension by dimension
PG wins on yield (3.05% vs 0.56%)
On a $10,000 investment that's about $249 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.
PG's higher yield (3.05%) looks attractive but investors should weigh whether the extra income compensates for any additional risk versus COST's 0.56% — especially if the higher yield is driven by covered calls or a falling share price.
COST wins on safety (8.3/10 vs 7.0/10)
Our score combines yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size. COST scores better on the weighted average of those factors.
COST (8.3/10) scores 1.3 points higher than PG (7.0/10). A higher safety score means lower historical indicators of dividend cut risk — payout ratio, yield zone, and trend all factor in.
COST shows healthier dividend-vs-price trend
COST's yield is 0.04% below its 5y average, versus 0.55% for PG. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.
PG is less volatile (beta 0.38 vs 0.91)
Lower beta means smaller swings vs the S&P 500 — generally a steadier hold for income investors.
Comparable scale ($465.4B vs $332.3B)
Within 1.5x of each other on market cap / AUM — similar institutional footprint.
Both pay qualified-dividend-eligible distributions
Neither is structurally flagged for ordinary-income tax treatment. Most distributions should qualify for the lower long-term capital gains rate if holding-period requirements are met.
How we compare these
Every comparison on this page is computed from current public data, not written by hand. Yield comes from the most recent dividend distribution annualized over current price. Safety scores combine yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size — see our methodology for the exact formula. Tax-efficiency flags identify covered-call ETFs, REITs, and mREITs which distribute primarily as ordinary income.
This is educational, not investment advice.Scores reflect a snapshot of public data on the "as of" dates shown on each ticker's safety page. Verify on the issuer's investor relations page or your brokerage before making decisions.
Frequently asked
Which is better for income, COST or PG?
COST and PG are evenly matched (2–2 across six dimensions) — the right pick comes down to which dimension you weight most.
COST vs PG: which has a higher dividend yield?
COST yields 0.56% and PG yields 3.05%. On a $10,000 investment that's about $249 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.
Is COST or PG a safer dividend in 2026?
COST scores 8.3/10 (Strong) on the Infnits dividend safety scale. PG scores 7.0/10 (Solid). COST is the safer pick on our scoring model.
Which has better dividend growth, COST or PG?
COST's yield is 0.04% below its 5y average, versus 0.55% for PG. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.
COST vs PG: which is more tax-efficient?
Neither is structurally flagged for ordinary-income tax treatment. Most distributions should qualify for the lower long-term capital gains rate if holding-period requirements are met.
Get emailed when COST vs PG data updates.
Already own COST or PG? See if the other adds anything.
Connect your brokerage and Infnits checks whether adding either to your existing portfolio actually diversifies — or just duplicates exposure (ETF look-through included).
Check overlap with my portfolio →