Chipotle Mexican Grill vs Restaurant Brands International
CMG and QSR 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 CMG and QSR compare
Chipotle Mexican Grill is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Restaurant Brands International ($40.4B against $32.9B).
On earnings, Restaurant Brands International is cheaper: it trades at 17.2× trailing earnings, against 29.3× for Chipotle Mexican Grill.
Chipotle Mexican Grill grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.3% versus 5.5% for Restaurant Brands International).
Restaurant Brands International pays a dividend yielding 3.5%; Chipotle Mexican Grill does not pay one.
Chipotle Mexican Grill scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 9 for Restaurant Brands International), 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 | CMG | QSR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $40.4B | $32.9B |
| Share price | $31.89 | $72.41 |
| Change, 1 year | −19.8% | 9.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −11.1% | 21.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.03 | 0.46 |
| Employees | 130K | 54K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 29.3× | 17.2× (better) |
| P/S | 3.2× (better) | 3.4× |
| P/B | 18.3× | 8.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.0× | 15.9× (better) |
| P/FCF | 25.7× | 20.8× (better) |
| PEG | 1.38 | – |
| FCF yield | 3.9% | 4.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $43.65 | $77.90 |
| Margin of safety | 26.9% (better) | 7.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.3% (better) | 5.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.8% (better) | 13.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −7.9% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −2.7% | 62.5% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 35.4% (better) | 8.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 14.7% | 27.0% (better) |
| Net margin | 11.4% | – |
| FCF margin | 12.6% | 16.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 49.6% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 79.6% (better) | 16.2% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 3.36 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 4.17 |
| Current ratio | 0.72 | 0.96 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.65 (better) | 1.87 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | – |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 3.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 13 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 3.6% |
| Buyback yield | 6.9% (better) | 1.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.9% (better) | 4.9% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 90.8% | 70.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.70% | 27.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$7.2M (better) | −$55.7M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.0% | 5.6% |
Go deeper
- CMG stock overview
- CMG income statement
- CMG valuation and score
- QSR stock overview
- QSR income statement
- QSR valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.