Monster Beverage Corporation manufactures and distributes energy drinks globally. Founded in 1935 and headquartered in Minnesota, the company operates an asset-light model, outsourcing manufacturing to third-party bottlers and co-packers.
It competes in the non-alcoholic beverage sector alongside Red Bull, energy drink manufacturers, and soft drink giants.
Founded 1935Head office Minnesota, United StatesStaff ~4,000Revenue ~$7.49BWebsite ↗
Monster's emissions are rising 17% year-on-year while absolute reduction targets remain unvalidated. The company discloses Scope 1 and 2 data but lacks third-party verification, independently confirmed SBTi targets, and any Scope 3 reduction commitments despite Scope 3 representing 99% of total emissions. Weak biodiversity disclosure and a D-grade plastic pollution rating compound the picture.
Monster Beverage scores 32/100 (Below expectations) on SINK's independent climate assessment, scored from public data only. Scores are free. Companies can never pay for anything about their own score. Last verified May 2026.
That places Monster Beverage joint 620th of 934 companies scored, and joint 46th of 51 in Food & Beverage (non-meat).
Strongest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Controversies & Red Flags (5/10, 5/10). Weakest on Emissions Trajectory and Nature & Biodiversity Impact (2/10, 2/10).
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
A score changes when the evidence does. We use new published evidence at the next rescore. Anyone can send us new evidence, free. How to send it.
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × Scale9 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
33% of them were published by Monster Beverage itself; the rest come from independent sources.
Scored on 11 April 2026 under an earlier version of our method. We're re-checking it under the current method.
If you believe a source has been misread or a newer version exists, submit a challenge.
Use this score in tenders
Send the link, or the one-page score sheet. It links back to this page and every source. Free.
Open the score sheet →Send new evidence, free
Scored low because little is published? Publish what you do and send us the link, free. If it holds up, your score changes, and the change is logged on your page.
How to send evidence →Put your score on your website, free
It shows the current score and links to this page, so it changes when the score does.
Track this score
Bidding for a public contract? Check if you need a Carbon Reduction Plan, free →
Free, independent, every source shown. Send it to any buyer who asks about your sustainability.
Where Monster Beverage sits among food & beverage (non-meat) peers.
Among the 51 major food & beverage (non-meat) brands we've scored, Monster Beverage is tied =46th of 51, with 1 other.
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Monster Beverage.
Starbucks discloses comprehensive emissions data but is failing to reduce them—total emissions up 3% against a 50% reduction target by 2030.
See the breakdown →Riverford's own footprint was 12,812 tCO2e in its year to May 2025, up 8%, and it leaves out the food it buys in, the largest source for a food business, so the size deduction for an incomplete footprint applies.
See the breakdown →Coca-Cola cut Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 14% in 2025 but publishes only fragmented Scope 3 data, omitting packaging and ingredients.
See the breakdown →One email, every Sunday. Score changes, new research, the stories behind the numbers. Free.
We'll send one email to confirm. No spam. Unsubscribe in one click.
Checking a company?
Search free →Asked to prove you're sustainable?
Get your business scored, free →Been scored?
Find your page and claim it, free →Scores are free. Companies can never pay for anything about their own score.