Dave & Buster's Entertainment vs Papa Johns International
PLAY and PZZA 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 PLAY and PZZA compare
Papa Johns International is the larger company, worth 2.3 times as much as Dave & Buster's Entertainment ($632M against $280M).
Dave & Buster's Entertainment grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−1.5% versus −8.3% for Papa Johns International).
Papa Johns International keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.4% compared with −4.3% at Dave & Buster's Entertainment.
Papa Johns International pays a dividend yielding 7.2%; Dave & Buster's Entertainment does not pay one.
Papa Johns International scores higher on the StockData Score (13 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 | PLAY | PZZA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $280M | $632M |
| Share price | $8.03 | $19.19 |
| Change, 1 year | −41.8% | −56.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −78.0% | −85.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.30 | 1.00 |
| Employees | 24K | 9,400 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 4 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 25.6× |
| P/S | 0.1× (better) | 0.3× |
| P/B | 3.2× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 5.3× (better) | 7.8× |
| P/FCF | – | 29.6× |
| FCF yield | −5.7% | 3.4% (better) |
| Fair value | $31.52 | $29.91 |
| Margin of safety | 74.5% (better) | 35.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −1.5% (better) | −8.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 36.9% (better) | 2.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −1013% | −32.1% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −853% | −33.6% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −6.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 85.4% (better) | 28.9% |
| Operating margin | 1.7% | 4.3% (better) |
| Net margin | −4.3% | 1.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | −0.77% | 1.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | −69.7% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 1.7% | 21.1% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 17.15 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.50 | 4.05 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 0.2× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.30 | 0.77 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.69 | 3.41 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 7.2% |
| Payout ratio | – | 178% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 15.4% |
| Buyback yield | 0.00% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 7.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 119% | 114% |
| Held by insiders | 26.1% | 1.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $101K | – |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 39.6% | 21.1% |
Go deeper
- PLAY stock overview
- PLAY income statement
- PLAY valuation and score
- PZZA stock overview
- PZZA income statement
- PZZA valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.