EAT vs TXRH vs YUMC Stock Comparison

Brinker International, Texas Roadhouse and Yum China Holdings Prices as of Oct 29, 2026 Peers: Industry group
EAT Brinker International, Inc
$219.83 +10.4% 1M +91.2% 1Y
Market cap
$9.21B
P/E
18.5x
Revenue (TTM)
$5.93B
Div. yield
–
Full-Service Restaurants Consumer Discretionary
5 wins
TXRH Texas Roadhouse, Inc.
$182.96 +16.4% 1M +7.1% 1Y
Market cap
$12.00B
P/E
29.1x
Revenue (TTM)
$6.23B
Div. yield
1.60%
Full-Service Restaurants Consumer Discretionary
1 win
YUMC Yum China Holdings, Inc.
$45.19 +10.7% 1M +3.1% 1Y
Market cap
$15.59B
P/E
16.1x
Revenue (TTM)
$12.44B
Div. yield
2.46%
Quick-Service Restaurants Consumer Discretionary
6 wins

Head to Head

12 decided of 12

Yum China Holdings leads on 6 of the 12 questions below (Yum China Holdings 6, Brinker International 5, Texas Roadhouse 1). Which ones matter depends on what you are buying for; a cheap multiple and slow growth often come together.

QuestionEATTXRHYUMCLeader
Larger companyMarket capitalisation $9.21B $12.00B $15.59B YUMC
Cheaper on earningsLower P/E, profitable companies only 18.5x 29.1x 16.1x YUMC
Cheaper on forward earningsLower price / next fiscal year consensus EPS 15.9x 27.3x 14.9x YUMC
Faster revenue growthRevenue growth, trailing twelve months +6.1% +9.9% +8.8% TXRH
More profitableNet margin, trailing twelve months 8.4% 6.6% 7.8% EAT
Better return on capitalReturn on invested capital 61.3% 26.0% 16.5% EAT
Less leveragedLower net debt / EBITDA 0.5x -0.2x -0.7x YUMC
Higher dividend yieldTrailing dividend yield 0.00% 1.60% 2.46% YUMC
Better 1-year returnPrice return, last 12 months +91.2% +7.1% +3.1% EAT
Better 5-year returnAnnualised price return, 5 years +39.3%/yr +15.6%/yr -4.6%/yr EAT
Less volatileAnnualised volatility, 1 year 50.3% 31.7% 25.6% YUMC
Higher overall scoreMean of the five percentile scores vs peers 78/100 60/100 75/100 EAT

Percentile Scorecard

EATTXRHYUMC

Each axis is the mean percentile of its metrics against the company's industry group. 100 is the best in the group, 50 the middle.

Scores by Axis

AxisEATTXRHYUMC
Valuation 61 #20 of 50 33 #34 of 50 74 #14 of 50
Growth 91 #5 of 47 54 #22 of 47 50 #24 of 47
Profitability 96 #3 of 46 82 #9 of 46 69 #15 of 46
Financial Health 44 #29 of 51 72 #15 of 51 88 #7 of 51
Shareholder Returns 97 #2 of 32 58 #14 of 32 94 #3 of 32
Overall 78 60 75
  • EAT ranked among 53 companies in Restaurants
  • TXRH ranked among 53 companies in Restaurants
  • YUMC ranked among 53 companies in Restaurants

Price Performance

Price return, split-adjusted, before dividends. Click a name to hide or show it.

Returns

PeriodEATTXRHYUMCSPY
1 month +10.4%+16.4%+10.7% +0.7%
3 months +4.6%-12.1%-2.7% +3.7%
6 months +44.4%+13.6%-6.7% +7.1%
Year to date +53.2%+10.2%-5.3% +12.8%
1 year +91.2%+7.1%+3.1% +11.9%
3 years +558.2%+85.7%-14.9% +85.2%
3 years, per year +87.5%+22.9%-5.3% +22.8%
5 years +423.9%+106.0%-20.8% +67.6%
5 years, per year +39.3%+15.6%-4.6% +10.9%
10 years +357.7%+358.7%+85.5% +262.0%
10 years, per year +16.4%+16.5%+6.4% +13.7%

Risk

MeasureEATTXRHYUMCSPY
Volatility, 1Y 50.3%31.7%25.6% 12.7%
Downside volatility, 1Y 45.0%28.1%24.2% 12.6%
Beta vs S&P 500, 1Y 0.790.200.27 1.00
Return / volatility, 1Y 1.810.220.12 0.94
Max drawdown, 5Y -50.7%-27.3%-54.6% -25.4%
From 52-week high -13.5%-14.6%-22.0% -1.2%
52-week high $254.01$214.28$57.95 $779.14
52-week low $102.29$155.88$39.98 $631.97

Valuation History

Weekly multiples on trailing twelve-month fundamentals. Negative or extreme readings (a loss year, a collapsed denominator) are left out so the chart stays readable.

MultipleEATTXRHYUMC
P/E now vs peer median 18.5xmedian 21.0x 29.1xmedian 21.0x 16.1xmedian 21.0x
P/S now vs peer median 1.6xmedian 1.1x 1.9xmedian 1.1x 1.3xmedian 1.1x
EV/EBITDA now vs peer median 11.1xmedian 12.8x 16.8xmedian 12.8x 7.7xmedian 12.8x
P/FCF now vs peer median 15.3xmedian 17.6x 29.5xmedian 17.6x 16.6xmedian 17.6x
P/B now vs peer median 23.0xmedian 3.4x 7.6xmedian 3.4x 2.6xmedian 3.4x
PEG now vs peer median 0.33median 0.93 2.21median 0.93 0.98median 0.93

Financial History

Reported figures by fiscal period, placed on the calendar year (or quarter) each period ended in, so companies with different fiscal years line up.

Trailing twelve monthsEATTXRHYUMC
Revenue $5.93B $6.23B $12.44B
Gross profit $4.41B – $2.14B
Operating income $653.00M $482.80M $1.38B
Net income $500.80M $422.09M $1.05B
Free cash flow $601.00M $406.39M $940.00M
EPS (diluted) $11.65 $6.27 $2.79
Cash & equivalents $30.70M $202.43M $485.00M
Total debt $484.80M $50.00M $66.00M
Shares (diluted) 43.00M 65.92M 349.00M
Enterprise value $9.00B $11.36B $9.95B

All Metrics

58 metrics · best in bold

Bold marks the best reading: the lowest positive value for multiples, leverage and payout, the highest for everything else. The bar under each value is its percentile against that company's own peers. Hover a value for its rank and the peer median.

Valuation

12 metrics
MetricEATTXRHYUMC
P/E 18.5x 29.1x 16.1x
P/FCF 15.3x 29.5x 16.6x
P/Operating cash flow 11.0x 14.9x 9.9x
P/S 1.6x 1.9x 1.3x
P/B 23.0x 7.6x 2.6x
P/Tangible book 24.0x 7.7x 2.6x
EV/EBITDA 11.1x 16.8x 7.7x
EV/EBIT 14.8x 24.5x 10.3x
EV/Revenue 1.6x 1.9x 1.1x
EV/FCF 16.1x 29.2x 15.2x
EV/Operating cash flow 11.5x 14.7x 9.0x
PEG (3Y EPS CAGR) 0.33 2.21 0.98

Growth

14 metrics
MetricEATTXRHYUMC
Revenue growth (1Y) 6.1% 9.9% 8.8%
Revenue CAGR (3Y) 12.3% 12.7% 6.3%
Gross profit growth (1Y) 5.5% – 9.7%
Gross profit CAGR (3Y) 12.8% – 5.6%
Operating income growth (1Y) 13.9% -7.4% 12.8%
Operating income CAGR (3Y) 51.3% 12.3% 10.3%
Net income growth (1Y) 12.8% -5.8% 6.3%
Net income CAGR (3Y) 52.9% 12.2% 9.0%
EPS growth (1Y) 20.1% -4.7% 13.7%
EPS CAGR (3Y) 55.7% 13.2% 16.5%
Operating cash flow growth (1Y) 13.7% 8.2% 9.6%
Operating cash flow CAGR (3Y) 42.3% 17.0% -3.0%
Free cash flow growth (1Y) 28.0% 8.8% 12.7%
Free cash flow CAGR (3Y) 78.5% 24.8% -4.0%

Profitability

14 metrics
MetricEATTXRHYUMC
Gross margin 74.4% – 17.2%
EBITDA margin 14.7% 11.3% 14.9%
Operating margin 11.0% 7.7% 11.1%
Pretax margin 10.1% 7.8% 11.5%
Net margin 8.4% 6.6% 7.8%
FCF margin 10.1% 6.5% 7.6%
Operating cash flow margin 14.1% 12.9% 12.7%
Return on equity 118.7% 27.1% 17.3%
Return on assets 17.9% 11.6% 9.7%
Return on invested capital 61.3% 26.0% 16.5%
Return on capital employed 30.3% 17.0% 16.4%
Asset turnover 2.1x 1.7x 1.1x
Cash conversion (OCF / net income) 1.7x 1.9x 1.5x
Stock comp / revenue 0.5% 0.8% 0.3%

Financial Health

11 metrics
MetricEATTXRHYUMC
Debt / assets 17.5% 1.4% 0.6%
Debt / equity 1.2x 0.0x 0.0x
Net debt / EBITDA 0.5x -0.2x -0.7x
Debt / FCF 0.8x 0.1x 0.1x
Liabilities / assets 85.6% 57.0% 44.2%
Equity / assets 14.4% 43.0% 55.8%
Interest coverage 12.0x – –
Current ratio 0.3x 0.5x 1.0x
Quick ratio 0.2x 0.3x 0.6x
Cash ratio 0.0x 0.3x 0.6x
Altman Z-score 5.45 6.03 3.72

Shareholder Returns

7 metrics
MetricEATTXRHYUMC
Dividend yield – 1.6% 2.5%
Net buyback yield 5.1% 1.3% 8.4%
Shareholder yield 5.1% 3.0% 10.8%
Payout ratio (earnings) – 44.7% 35.7%
Payout ratio (FCF) – 46.4% 40.0%
Dividend growth (1Y) – 9.9% 24.5%
Dividend CAGR (3Y) – 11.7% 21.6%

Analyst Estimates

Solid lines are reported fiscal-year results; dashed lines are the consensus for the years ahead. Hover a year for the analysts' high and low, and how each result compared with its estimate.

ConsensusEATTXRHYUMC
Forward P/E 15.9xFY2027 27.3xFY2026 14.9xFY2026
EPS, next fiscal year $13.84FY2027 $6.71FY2026 $3.04FY2026
EPS growth, next FY +28.9%FY2027 +10.0%FY2026 +21.1%FY2026
EPS growth, the year after -0.8% +10.6% +15.5%
Revenue, next fiscal year $5.99BFY2027 $6.74BFY2026 $12.37BFY2026
Revenue growth, next FY +3.1%FY2027 +14.7%FY2026 +4.8%FY2026
Revenue growth, the year after +12.2% +8.4% +6.3%

Institutional Ownership

13F filings, quarter ended Jun 30, 2026
HoldersEATTXRHYUMC
Held by institutions 100.0% 99.0% –
Institutions holding 508 647 –
Change in shares held, QoQ -1.4% -1.0% –
Institutions buying 279 312 –
Institutions selling 161 249 –
Buyers to sellers 1.73 1.25 –

Return Correlation

Daily returns, last 12 months

1.00 means two stocks move in lockstep, 0 that they move independently. Pairs below about 0.5 diversify each other.

EATTXRHYUMC
EAT 1.00 0.43 0.29
TXRH 0.43 1.00 0.23
YUMC 0.29 0.23 1.00

Add a Peer

Largest companies in the same industry

Related Comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is bigger, EAT, TXRH and YUMC?

Yum China Holdings (YUMC) is the largest by market capitalisation: Brinker International (EAT) $9.21B, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) $12.00B, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) $15.59B.

Which stock is cheaper, EAT, TXRH and YUMC?

Yum China Holdings (YUMC) trades on the lowest price-to-earnings ratio (Brinker International (EAT) 18.5x, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) 29.1x, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) 16.1x). On next year's consensus earnings, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) is cheapest (Brinker International (EAT) 15.9x, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) 27.3x, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) 14.9x). A lower multiple can reflect slower expected growth, so read it next to the growth figures.

Which company is growing faster?

Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) grew revenue fastest over the trailing twelve months: Brinker International (EAT) +6.1%, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) +9.9%, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) +8.8%.

Which company is more profitable?

Brinker International (EAT) has the highest net margin (Brinker International (EAT) 8.4%, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) 6.6%, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) 7.8%). On return on invested capital, Brinker International (EAT) leads (Brinker International (EAT) 61.3%, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) 26.0%, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) 16.5%).

Which stock has performed better?

Over the past year Brinker International (EAT) returned the most: Brinker International (EAT) +91.2%, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) +7.1%, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) +3.1%. Over five years, Brinker International (EAT) compounded fastest (Brinker International (EAT) +39.3%/yr, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) +15.6%/yr, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) -4.6%/yr). Returns are price only, before dividends.

Which pays a higher dividend?

Yum China Holdings (YUMC) has the highest dividend yield: Brinker International (EAT) 0.00%, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) 1.60%, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) 2.46%. Brinker International (EAT) pays no regular dividend.

Which stock is riskier?

By one-year price volatility, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) has been the steadiest (Brinker International (EAT) 50.3%, Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) 31.7%, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) 25.6%). Volatility measures how widely the price swings, not the risk of the business.

Which is the better stock, EAT, TXRH and YUMC?

There is no single answer; it depends on what you are buying for. On the 12 head-to-head measures on this page, Yum China Holdings (YUMC) leads on 6. Business Quant does not give investment advice; use the comparison as a starting point for your own research.

Data from SEC filings, exchange prices and consensus estimates, via Business Quant. Percentile scores compare each company with its own peer group, so two companies' scores are each relative to different peers unless you rank against the whole market. Price returns exclude dividends. Nothing on this page is investment advice.