Flanigans Enterprises vs Good Times Restaurants
BDL and GTIM side by side, both in eating and drinking places. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BDL and GTIM compare
Flanigans Enterprises is the larger company, worth 7.8 times as much as Good Times Restaurants ($105M against $13.4M).
On earnings, Good Times Restaurants is cheaper: it trades at 6.0× trailing earnings, against 15.8× for Flanigans Enterprises.
Flanigans Enterprises grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.1% versus −5.8% for Good Times Restaurants).
Flanigans Enterprises keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.1% compared with 1.7% at Good Times Restaurants.
Flanigans Enterprises pays a dividend yielding 1.1%; Good Times Restaurants does not pay one.
Flanigans Enterprises scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 10 for Good Times Restaurants), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | BDL | GTIM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $105M | $13.4M |
| Share price | $56.49 | $1.27 |
| Change, 1 year | 79.2% | −3.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 65.9% | −73.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.27 | 0.66 |
| Employees | 2,033 | 2,078 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 15.8× | 6.0× (better) |
| P/S | 0.5× | 0.1× (better) |
| P/B | 1.5× | 0.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.5× | 2.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | 22.7× | 5.1× (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.4% | 19.6% (better) |
| Fair value | $69.27 | $4.08 |
| Margin of safety | 18.4% | 68.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.1% (better) | −5.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 12.7% (better) | 5.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 53.6% | 77.7% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 53.2% | 75.0% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 35.2% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 5.3% (better) | 1.3% |
| Net margin | 3.1% (better) | 1.7% |
| FCF margin | 2.1% (better) | 1.9% |
| Return on equity | 9.9% (better) | 6.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 15.2% (better) | 5.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.45 | 0.01 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.16 (better) | −0.59 |
| Interest coverage | 10.3× | 11.5× (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.04 (better) | 0.47 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.24 (better) | 1.58 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.1% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.1% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 10.4% | 11.5% |
| Held by insiders | 70.5% | 1.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $119K | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.5% | 0.14% |
Go deeper
- BDL stock overview
- BDL income statement
- BDL valuation and score
- GTIM stock overview
- GTIM income statement
- GTIM valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.