McDonalds vs Yum China
MCD 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 MCD and YUMC compare
Yum China is the larger company, worth 85067 times as much as McDonalds ($15.7B against $184K).
Yum China grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.8% versus 6.3% for McDonalds).
McDonalds keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 31.7% compared with 7.8% at Yum China.
Both pay dividends: McDonalds yields 2.9% and Yum China 1.9%.
Yum China scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 17 for McDonalds), 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 | MCD | YUMC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $184K | $15.7B |
| Share price | $258.12 | $45.78 |
| Change, 1 year | −14.6% | 4.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 1.3% | −19.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.48 | 0.46 |
| Employees | 150K | 290K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 | 20 (better) |
| Valuation score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 16.8× |
| P/S | 0.0× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | – | 2.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 2.9× (better) | 8.2× |
| P/FCF | 0.0× (better) | 16.7× |
| PEG | – | 0.49 |
| FCF yield | 4211120% (better) | 6.0% |
| Fair value | $158484000.00 | $62.17 |
| Margin of safety | 100.0% (better) | 26.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.3% | 8.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.0% | 7.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 4.7% | 6.1% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 12.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.6% (better) | 5.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 46.2% (better) | 11.1% |
| Net margin | 31.7% (better) | 7.8% |
| FCF margin | 28.0% (better) | 7.6% |
| Return on equity | – | 17.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 27.1% (better) | 26.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.01 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.94 (better) | −0.71 |
| Interest coverage | 7.9× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.08 (better) | 0.96 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.86 | 3.73 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.9% (better) | 1.9% |
| Payout ratio | 59.5% | 38.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.3% | 32.0% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 1262090% (better) | 8.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 1262090% (better) | 10.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 74.6% | 68.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.03% | 3.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$40.5M | −$10.8M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.0% | 1.8% |
Go deeper
- MCD stock overview
- MCD income statement
- MCD 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.