Restaurants
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CAVA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs CMG vs AAPL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Software - Infrastructure
Restaurants
Consumer Electronics
CAVA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs CMG vs AAPL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Restaurants | Specialty Retail | Software - Infrastructure | Restaurants | Consumer Electronics |
| Market Cap | $9.82B | $2.92T | $3.13T | $43.33B | $4.22T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $848M | $742.78B | $318.27B | $12.14B | $451.44B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $38M | $90.80B | $125.22B | $1.45B | $122.58B |
| Gross Margin | 67.4% | 50.6% | 68.3% | 36.1% | 47.9% |
| Operating Margin | 4.7% | 11.5% | 46.8% | 15.8% | 32.6% |
| Forward P/E | 161.5x | 34.8x | 25.3x | 29.3x | 33.8x |
| Total Debt | $466M | $152.99B | $112.18B | $9.85B | $112.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $283M | $86.81B | $30.24B | $351M | $35.93B |
CAVA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs CMG vs AAPL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CAVA Group, Inc. (CAVA) | 100 | 206.4 | +106.4% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 208.0 | +108.0% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 123.6 | +23.6% |
| Chipotle Mexican Gr… (CMG) | 100 | 77.8 | -22.2% |
| Apple Inc. (AAPL) | 100 | 148.2 | +48.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CAVA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs CMG vs AAPL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CAVA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, AMZN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
MSFT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 19 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 0.8%
- Rev growth 14.9%, EPS growth 15.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 12.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.89, Low D/E 32.7%, current ratio 1.35x
- Beta 0.89, yield 0.8%, current ratio 1.35x
CMG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.83 vs AAPL's 1.89
- Lower P/E (29.3x vs 33.8x), PEG 0.83 vs 1.89
AAPL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 11.7% 10Y total return vs MSFT's 7.9%
- +47.0% vs CMG's -35.6%
- 34.0% ROA vs CAVA's 2.8%, ROIC 67.4% vs 5.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.9% revenue growth vs CAVA's -12.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (29.3x vs 33.8x), PEG 0.83 vs 1.89 | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs CAVA's 4.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.89 vs CAVA's 1.83, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 19-year raise streak, vs AAPL's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +47.0% vs CMG's -35.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 34.0% ROA vs CAVA's 2.8%, ROIC 67.4% vs 5.0% |
CAVA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs CMG vs AAPL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CAVA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs CMG vs AAPL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSFT leads in 2 of 6 categories
AAPL leads 2 • CMG leads 1 • CAVA leads 0 • AMZN leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN is the larger business by revenue, generating $742.8B annually — 876.1x CAVA's $848M. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CAVA's 4.5%. On growth, MSFT holds the edge at +18.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $848M | $742.8B | $318.3B | $12.1B | $451.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $113M | $155.9B | $192.6B | $2.3B | $160.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $38M | $90.8B | $125.2B | $1.5B | $122.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $26M | -$2.5B | $72.9B | $1.5B | $129.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.4% | +50.6% | +68.3% | +36.1% | +47.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.7% | +11.5% | +46.8% | +15.8% | +32.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.5% | +12.2% | +39.3% | +12.0% | +27.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +3.1% | -0.3% | +22.9% | +12.4% | +28.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -125.0% | +16.6% | +18.3% | +7.4% | +16.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -127.3% | +74.8% | +23.4% | -17.9% | +21.8% |
Valuation Metrics
CMG leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 29.2x trailing earnings, CMG trades at a 81% valuation discount to CAVA's 156.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CMG offers better value at 0.82x vs AAPL's 2.16x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $9.8B | $2.92T | $3.13T | $43.3B | $4.22T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $10.0B | $2.98T | $3.21T | $52.8B | $4.30T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 156.52x | 37.82x | 30.86x | 29.18x | 38.53x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 161.48x | 34.77x | 25.34x | 29.29x | 33.78x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.35x | 1.64x | 0.82x | 2.16x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 77.54x | 20.47x | 19.72x | 22.25x | 29.68x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 11.58x | 4.07x | 11.10x | 3.63x | 10.14x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 12.79x | 7.14x | 9.15x | 15.78x | 58.49x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 375.47x | 378.98x | 43.66x | 29.93x | 42.72x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AAPL leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AAPL delivers a 146.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $147 in annual profit, vs $5 for CAVA. MSFT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.33x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CMG's 3.48x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AAPL scores 8/9 vs CMG's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +4.9% | +23.3% | +33.1% | +48.4% | +146.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.8% | +11.5% | +19.2% | +16.0% | +34.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.0% | +14.7% | +24.9% | +15.3% | +67.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.9% | +15.3% | +29.7% | +25.4% | +69.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.60x | 0.37x | 0.33x | 3.48x | 1.52x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $183M | $66.2B | $81.9B | $9.5B | $76.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $283M | $86.8B | $30.2B | $351M | $35.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $466M | $153.0B | $112.2B | $9.8B | $112.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 39.96x | 55.65x | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AAPL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AAPL five years ago would be worth $22,442 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,666 for CMG. Over the past 12 months, AAPL leads with a +47.0% total return vs CMG's -35.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AMZN at 36.8% vs CMG's -6.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +39.6% | +19.7% | -10.8% | -11.3% | +6.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -9.9% | +43.7% | -2.1% | -35.6% | +47.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.1% | +156.2% | +39.5% | -18.2% | +67.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.1% | +64.8% | +72.5% | +16.7% | +124.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.1% | +697.8% | +787.7% | +267.2% | +1174.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +24.5% | +36.8% | +11.7% | -6.5% | +18.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MSFT and AAPL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSFT is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CAVA's 1.83 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AAPL currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs CMG's 56.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.83x | 1.51x | 0.89x | 1.11x | 0.99x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $101.50 | $278.56 | $555.45 | $58.42 | $292.13 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $43.41 | $185.01 | $356.28 | $29.75 | $193.25 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +83.3% | +97.3% | +75.8% | +56.9% | +98.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.9 | 81.1 | 54.0 | 43.0 | 69.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.8M | 45.5M | 32.5M | 14.5M | 39.8M |
Analyst Outlook
MSFT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CAVA as "Buy", AMZN as "Buy", MSFT as "Buy", CMG as "Buy", AAPL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 31.4% upside for CMG (target: $44) vs -2.2% for CAVA (target: $83). For income investors, MSFT offers the higher dividend yield at 0.77% vs AAPL's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $82.63 | $306.77 | $551.75 | $43.72 | $317.11 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 23 | 94 | 81 | 67 | 110 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.8% | — | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 19 | — | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $3.23 | — | $1.03 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.6% | +5.6% | +2.1% |
MSFT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). AAPL leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
CAVA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs CMG vs AAPL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CAVA or AMZN or MSFT or CMG or AAPL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger pick with 14.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -12. 0% for CAVA Group, Inc. (CAVA). Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. (CMG) offers the better valuation at 29. 2x trailing P/E (29. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate CAVA Group, Inc. (CAVA) a "Buy" — based on 23 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — CAVA or AMZN or MSFT or CMG or AAPL?
On trailing P/E, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.
(CMG) is the cheapest at 29. 2x versus CAVA Group, Inc. at 156. 5x. On forward P/E, Microsoft Corporation is actually cheaper at 25. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. wins at 0. 83x versus Apple Inc. 's 1. 89x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CAVA or AMZN or MSFT or CMG or AAPL?
Over the past 5 years, Apple Inc.
(AAPL) delivered a total return of +124. 4%, compared to +16. 7% for Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. (CMG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AAPL returned +1174% versus CAVA's +93. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CAVA or AMZN or MSFT or CMG or AAPL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
89β versus CAVA Group, Inc. 's 1. 83β — meaning CAVA is approximately 107% more volatile than MSFT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 33% versus 3% for Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CAVA or AMZN or MSFT or CMG or AAPL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is pulling ahead at 14.
9% versus -12. 0% for CAVA Group, Inc. (CAVA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amazon. com, Inc. grew EPS 29. 7% year-over-year, compared to -50. 9% for CAVA Group, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CAVA leads at 14. 5% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — CAVA or AMZN or MSFT or CMG or AAPL?
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 36.
1% net margin versus 7. 5% for CAVA Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 36. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus 6. 5% for CAVA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSFT leads at 68. 8%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is CAVA or AMZN or MSFT or CMG or AAPL more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. (CMG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 83x versus Apple Inc. 's 1. 89x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) trades at 25. 3x forward P/E versus 161. 5x for CAVA Group, Inc. — 136. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CMG: 31. 4% to $43. 72.
08Which pays a better dividend — CAVA or AMZN or MSFT or CMG or AAPL?
In this comparison, MSFT (0.
8% yield), AAPL (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CAVA, AMZN, CMG do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CAVA or AMZN or MSFT or CMG or AAPL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
89), 0. 8% yield, +787. 7% 10Y return). CAVA Group, Inc. (CAVA) carries a higher beta of 1. 83 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSFT: +787. 7%, CAVA: +93. 1%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between CAVA and AMZN and MSFT and CMG and AAPL?
These companies operate in different sectors (CAVA (Consumer Cyclical) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical) and MSFT (Technology) and CMG (Consumer Cyclical) and AAPL (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
MSFT pays a dividend while CAVA, AMZN, CMG, AAPL do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.