Sweetgreen vs Wingstop
SG and WING 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 SG and WING compare
Wingstop is the larger company, worth 3.1 times as much as Sweetgreen ($4.1B against $1.3B).
On earnings, Wingstop is cheaper: it trades at 35.6× trailing earnings, against 111× for Sweetgreen.
Wingstop grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.6% versus −0.65% for Sweetgreen).
Wingstop keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 16.2% compared with 2.0% at Sweetgreen.
Wingstop pays a dividend yielding 0.82%; Sweetgreen does not pay one.
Wingstop scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 8 for Sweetgreen), 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 | SG | WING |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.3B | $4.1B |
| Share price | $11.07 | $149.73 |
| Change, 1 year | 59.5% | −38.3% |
| Change, 5 years | – | −10.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.71 | 1.41 |
| Employees | 6,486 | 1,367 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 111× | 35.6× (better) |
| P/S | 1.9× (better) | 5.7× |
| P/B | 2.8× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 22.7× |
| P/FCF | – | 31.7× |
| PEG | – | 0.68 |
| FCF yield | −8.8% | 3.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $4.65 | $199.40 |
| Margin of safety | −138% | 24.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −0.65% | 7.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 25.2% (better) | 22.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −32.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −29.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 51.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 11.7% | 86.3% (better) |
| Operating margin | −21.4% | 27.9% (better) |
| Net margin | 2.0% | 16.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | −17.1% | 17.8% (better) |
| Return on equity | 3.1% | – |
| Return on invested capital | −45.4% | 50.3% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 4.76 |
| Interest coverage | −1404.9× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.43 | 2.97 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.71 | 2.41 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.82% |
| Payout ratio | – | 28.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | −27.0% |
| Buyback yield | – | 4.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 5.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 80.7% | 124% |
| Held by insiders | 12.2% | 0.73% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $4.1M (better) | −$986K |
| Short interest, % of float | 23.8% | 18.6% |
Go deeper
- SG stock overview
- SG income statement
- SG valuation and score
- WING stock overview
- WING income statement
- WING valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.