Dine Brands Global vs Dave & Buster's Entertainment
DIN and PLAY 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 PLAY compare
Dine Brands Global is the larger company, worth 1.7 times as much as Dave & Buster's Entertainment ($460M against $273M).
Dine Brands Global grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.6% versus −1.5% for Dave & Buster's Entertainment).
Dine Brands Global keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 0.44% compared with −4.3% at Dave & Buster's Entertainment.
Dine Brands Global pays a dividend yielding 2.1%; Dave & Buster's Entertainment does not pay one.
Dine Brands Global scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 4 for Dave & Buster's Entertainment), 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 | PLAY |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $460M | $273M |
| Share price | $36.33 | $7.85 |
| Change, 1 year | 42.6% | −45.0% |
| Change, 5 years | −54.4% | −78.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.95 | 1.29 |
| Employees | 992 | 24K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 4 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 107× | – |
| P/S | 0.5× | 0.1× (better) |
| P/B | – | 3.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | 6.8× | 5.3× (better) |
| FCF yield | −0.39% (better) | −5.9% |
| Fair value | $56.45 | $31.40 |
| Margin of safety | 35.6% | 75.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.6% (better) | −1.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.0% | 36.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −88.1% (better) | −1013% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −84.8% (better) | −853% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 38.1% | 85.4% (better) |
| Operating margin | – | 1.7% |
| Net margin | 0.44% (better) | −4.3% |
| FCF margin | −0.19% (better) | −0.77% |
| Return on equity | – | −69.7% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 1.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 17.15 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 4.50 |
| Interest coverage | – | 0.2× |
| Current ratio | 0.87 (better) | 0.30 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.78 (better) | 0.69 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.1% | – |
| Payout ratio | 356% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 3.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 14.5% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 16.6% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100% | 119% |
| Held by insiders | 17.1% | 26.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $187K (better) | $101K |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 28.2% | 39.6% |
Go deeper
- DIN stock overview
- DIN income statement
- DIN valuation and score
- PLAY stock overview
- PLAY income statement
- PLAY valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.