Chipotle Mexican Grill vs Yum China
CMG and YUMC 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 YUMC compare
Chipotle Mexican Grill is the larger company, worth 2.6 times as much as Yum China ($40.4B against $15.7B).
On earnings, Yum China is cheaper: it trades at 16.8× trailing earnings, against 29.3× for Chipotle Mexican Grill.
Yum China grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.8% versus 7.3% for Chipotle Mexican Grill).
Chipotle Mexican Grill keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.4% compared with 7.8% at Yum China.
Yum China pays a dividend yielding 1.9%; Chipotle Mexican Grill does not pay one.
Yum China scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 17 for Chipotle Mexican Grill), 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 | YUMC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $40.4B | $15.7B |
| Share price | $31.89 | $45.78 |
| Change, 1 year | −19.8% | 4.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −11.1% | −19.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.03 | 0.46 |
| Employees | 130K | 290K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 | 20 (better) |
| Valuation score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 5 | 5 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 29.3× | 16.8× (better) |
| P/S | 3.2× | 1.3× (better) |
| P/B | 18.3× | 2.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.0× | 8.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 25.7× | 16.7× (better) |
| PEG | 1.38 | 0.49 (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.9% | 6.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $43.65 | $62.17 |
| Margin of safety | 26.9% (better) | 26.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.3% | 8.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.8% (better) | 7.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −7.9% | 6.1% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −2.7% | 12.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 35.4% (better) | 5.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 14.7% (better) | 11.1% |
| Net margin | 11.4% (better) | 7.8% |
| FCF margin | 12.6% (better) | 7.6% |
| Return on equity | 49.6% (better) | 17.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 79.6% (better) | 26.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.01 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −0.71 |
| Current ratio | 0.72 | 0.96 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.65 (better) | 3.73 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.9% |
| Payout ratio | – | 38.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 3 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 32.0% |
| Buyback yield | 6.9% | 8.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 6.9% | 10.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 90.8% | 68.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.70% | 3.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$7.2M (better) | −$10.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.0% | 1.8% |
Go deeper
- CMG stock overview
- CMG income statement
- CMG valuation and score
- YUMC stock overview
- YUMC income statement
- YUMC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.