Computed head-to-head · 6 dimensions

COST vs WMT

Costco Wholesale Corporation versus Walmart Inc. — yield, safety, growth trend, cost, scale, and tax treatment.

WMT wins 5–0 on our six-dimension comparison, but COST can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.

Scorecard at a glance

Dimension	COST	WMT	Winner
Yield	0.56%	0.87%	WMT wins
Dividend safety	8.3/10	8.8/10	WMT wins
Growth trend	-0.04% vs 5y	-0.39% vs 5y	WMT wins
Volatility (beta)	0.91	0.60	WMT wins
Scale	$465.4B	$884.1B	WMT wins
Tax efficiency	Qualified-eligible	Qualified-eligible	Tie
Overall	0 wins	5 wins	WMT wins

Dimension by dimension

WMT wins on yield (0.87% vs 0.56%)

On a $10,000 investment that's about $31 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.

WMT's higher yield (0.87%) 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: 0.56%WMT: 0.87%

WMT wins on safety (8.8/10 vs 8.3/10)

Our score combines yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size. WMT scores better on the weighted average of those factors.

WMT (8.8/10) scores 0.5 points higher than COST (8.3/10). A higher safety score means lower historical indicators of dividend cut risk — payout ratio, yield zone, and trend all factor in.

COST: 8.3/10WMT: 8.8/10

WMT shows healthier dividend-vs-price trend

WMT's yield is 0.39% below its 5y average, versus 0.04% for COST. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.

COST: -0.04% vs 5yWMT: -0.39% vs 5y

WMT is less volatile (beta 0.60 vs 0.91)

Lower beta means smaller swings vs the S&P 500 — generally a steadier hold for income investors.

COST: 0.91WMT: 0.60

WMT is 1.9× larger by market cap

Larger companies tend to have tighter spreads, deeper liquidity, and lower closure risk.

COST: $465.4BWMT: $884.1B

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.

COST: Qualified-eligibleWMT: Qualified-eligible

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 WMT?

WMT wins 5–0 on our six-dimension comparison, but COST can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.

COST vs WMT: which has a higher dividend yield?

COST yields 0.56% and WMT yields 0.87%. On a $10,000 investment that's about $31 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.

Is COST or WMT a safer dividend in 2026?

COST scores 8.3/10 (Strong) on the Infnits dividend safety scale. WMT scores 8.8/10 (Strong). WMT is the safer pick on our scoring model.

Which has better dividend growth, COST or WMT?