Obesity is a critical global health issue driven by dietary, physiological, and environmental factors, and is strongly associated with chronic diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular disorders, and cancer. Machine learning has emerged as a promising approach for early obesity risk prediction, yet a comparative evaluation of ensemble techniques -- particularly hybrid majority voting and ensemble stacking -- remains limited. This study aims to compare hybrid majority voting and ensemble stacking methods for obesity risk prediction, identifying which approach delivers higher accuracy and efficiency. The analysis seeks to highlight the complementary strengths of these ensemble techniques in guiding better predictive model selection for healthcare applications. Two datasets were utilized to evaluate three ensemble models: Majority Hard Voting, Weighted Hard Voting, and Stacking (with a Multi-Layer Perceptron as meta-classifier). A pool of nine Machine Learning (ML) algorithms, evaluated across a total of 50 hyperparameter configurations, was analyzed to identify the top three models to serve as base learners for the ensemble methods. Preprocessing steps involved dataset balancing, and outlier detection, and model performance was evaluated using Accuracy and F1-Score. On Dataset-1, weighted hard voting and stacking achieved nearly identical performance (Accuracy: 0.920304, F1: 0.920070), outperforming majority hard voting. On Dataset-2, stacking demonstrated superior results (Accuracy: 0.989837, F1: 0.989825) compared to majority hard voting (Accuracy: 0.981707, F1: 0.981675) and weighted hard voting, which showed the lowest performance. The findings confirm that ensemble stacking provides stronger predictive capability, particularly for complex data distributions, while hybrid majority voting remains a robust alternative.