Darden Restaurants vs Yum China
DRI 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 DRI and YUMC compare
Darden Restaurants is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as Yum China ($25.1B against $15.7B).
On earnings, Yum China is cheaper: it trades at 16.8× trailing earnings, against 21.5× for Darden Restaurants.
Yum China grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.8% versus 8.1% for Darden Restaurants).
Darden Restaurants keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.8% compared with 7.8% at Yum China.
Both pay dividends: Darden Restaurants yields 2.8% and Yum China 1.9%.
Yum China scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 13 for Darden 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 | DRI | YUMC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $25.1B | $15.7B |
| Share price | $220.17 | $45.78 |
| Change, 1 year | 20.7% | 4.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 42.5% | −19.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.65 | 0.46 |
| Employees | 177K | 290K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 20 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 | 5 |
| Health score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.5× | 16.8× (better) |
| P/S | 1.9× | 1.3× (better) |
| P/B | 12.1× | 2.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.1× | 8.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 23.8× | 16.7× (better) |
| PEG | 2.36 | 0.49 (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.2% | 6.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $227.71 | $62.17 |
| Margin of safety | 3.3% | 26.4% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.1% | 8.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 12.9% (better) | 7.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 7.5% (better) | 6.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 9.9% | 12.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 16.8% (better) | 5.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.3% | – |
| Operating margin | 11.7% (better) | 11.1% |
| Net margin | 8.8% (better) | 7.8% |
| FCF margin | 7.9% (better) | 7.6% |
| Return on equity | 55.1% (better) | 17.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 54.7% (better) | 26.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.47 | 0.01 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.36 (better) | −0.71 |
| Current ratio | 0.30 | 0.96 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.52 | 3.73 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.8% (better) | 1.9% |
| Payout ratio | 59.4% | 38.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 31.1% | 32.0% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 2.7% | 8.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 5.5% | 10.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 98.8% | 68.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.37% | 3.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$24.1M | −$10.8M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.9% | 1.8% |
Go deeper
- DRI stock overview
- DRI income statement
- DRI 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.