Dine Brands Global vs First Watch Restaurant
DIN and FWRG 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 DIN and FWRG compare
First Watch Restaurant is the larger company, worth 1.7 times as much as Dine Brands Global ($786M against $450M).
On earnings, First Watch Restaurant is cheaper: it trades at 43.9× trailing earnings, against 75.6× for Dine Brands Global.
First Watch Restaurant grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (19.3% versus 6.4% for Dine Brands Global).
First Watch Restaurant keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.4% compared with 0.75% at Dine Brands Global.
Dine Brands Global pays a dividend yielding 2.1%; First Watch Restaurant does not pay one.
First Watch Restaurant scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 10 for Dine Brands Global), 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 | DIN | FWRG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $450M | $786M |
| Share price | $35.51 | $12.74 |
| Change, 1 year | 40.8% | −25.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −62.0% | −36.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.98 | 1.14 |
| Employees | 992 | 30 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 11 (better) |
| Valuation score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 75.6× | 43.9× (better) |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 0.6× |
| P/B | – | 1.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | 6.3× (better) | 9.5× |
| P/FCF | 71.4× | – |
| PEG | – | 1.06 |
| FCF yield | 1.4% (better) | −2.7% |
| Fair value | $60.60 | $16.85 |
| Margin of safety | 41.4% (better) | 24.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.4% | 19.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.0% | 29.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −85.3% | 336% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −84.3% | 383% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 39.5% | – |
| Operating margin | – | 2.1% |
| Net margin | 0.75% | 1.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | 0.70% (better) | −1.6% |
| Return on equity | – | 2.9% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 3.2% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.46 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.43 |
| Interest coverage | – | 1.5× |
| Current ratio | 0.86 (better) | 0.27 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.75 | 1.06 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.1% | – |
| Payout ratio | 295% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 3.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 18.3% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 20.5% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100% | 106% |
| Held by insiders | 11.4% | – |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $386K (better) | −$1.6M |
| Short interest, % of float | 20.1% | – |
Go deeper
- DIN stock overview
- DIN income statement
- DIN valuation and score
- FWRG stock overview
- FWRG income statement
- FWRG valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.