Darden Restaurants vs Texas Roadhouse
DRI and TXRH 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 DRI and TXRH compare
Darden Restaurants is the larger company, worth 2.1 times as much as Texas Roadhouse ($25.1B against $12.0B).
On earnings, Darden Restaurants is cheaper: it trades at 21.5× trailing earnings, against 29.2× for Texas Roadhouse.
Texas Roadhouse grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (9.9% versus 8.1% for Darden Restaurants).
Both pay dividends: Darden Restaurants yields 2.8% and Texas Roadhouse 1.6%.
Darden Restaurants scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 11 for Texas Roadhouse), 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 | DRI | TXRH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $25.1B | $12.0B |
| Share price | $220.17 | $182.52 |
| Change, 1 year | 20.7% | 6.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 42.5% | 90.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.65 | 0.75 |
| Employees | 177K | 101K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.5× (better) | 29.2× |
| P/S | 1.9× (better) | 1.9× |
| P/B | 12.1× | 7.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.1× (better) | 16.8× |
| P/FCF | 23.8× (better) | 29.5× |
| PEG | 2.36 | 1.90 (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.2% (better) | 3.4% |
| Fair value | $227.71 | $153.81 |
| Margin of safety | 3.3% (better) | −18.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.1% | 9.9% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 12.9% | 19.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 7.5% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 9.9% (better) | −4.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 16.8% | 68.4% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.3% | – |
| Operating margin | 11.7% (better) | 7.7% |
| Net margin | 8.8% | – |
| FCF margin | 7.9% (better) | 6.5% |
| Return on equity | 55.1% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 54.7% (better) | 31.2% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.47 | 0.03 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.36 (better) | −0.22 |
| Current ratio | 0.30 | 0.46 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.52 | 6.02 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | – |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.8% (better) | 1.6% |
| Payout ratio | 59.4% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 5 | 5 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 31.1% | 49.8% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 2.7% (better) | 1.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 5.5% (better) | 3.0% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 98.8% | 99.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.37% | 0.53% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$24.1M | −$9.9M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.9% | 3.5% |
Go deeper
- DRI stock overview
- DRI income statement
- DRI valuation and score
- TXRH stock overview
- TXRH income statement
- TXRH valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.