Leisure
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FUN vs MCD vs QSR vs SBUX vs YUM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Restaurants
Restaurants
Restaurants
Restaurants
FUN vs MCD vs QSR vs SBUX vs YUM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Leisure | Restaurants | Restaurants | Restaurants | Restaurants |
| Market Cap | $1.99B | $202.32B | $26.74B | $121.31B | $43.13B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.14B | $26.26B | $9.59B | $37.70B | $8.48B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1.75B | $8.41B | $955M | $1.37B | $1.74B |
| Gross Margin | 73.8% | 57.4% | 33.1% | 20.6% | 45.7% |
| Operating Margin | -41.4% | 46.1% | 25.1% | 9.0% | 31.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | 21.5x | 19.0x | 44.9x | 23.1x |
| Total Debt | $5.16B | $51.95B | $17.58B | $26.61B | $11.91B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $83M | $1.08B | $1.16B | $3.22B | $709M |
FUN vs MCD vs QSR vs SBUX vs YUM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Six Flags Entertain… (FUN) | 100 | 61.9 | -38.1% |
| McDonald's Corporat… (MCD) | 100 | 152.5 | +52.5% |
| Restaurant Brands I… (QSR) | 100 | 141.4 | +41.4% |
| Starbucks Corporati… (SBUX) | 100 | 136.5 | +36.5% |
| Yum! Brands, Inc. (YUM) | 100 | 173.9 | +73.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FUN vs MCD vs QSR vs SBUX vs YUM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FUN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 50.6%, EPS growth -195.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 26.5%
- 50.6% revenue growth vs MCD's 1.7%
MCD has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 26 yrs, beta 0.11, yield 2.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.11, current ratio 1.19x
- Beta 0.11, yield 2.4%, current ratio 1.19x
- 32.0% margin vs FUN's -55.7%
QSR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and dividends is your priority.
- Lower P/E (19.0x vs 44.9x)
- 3.1% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs MCD's 2.4%
SBUX is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +31.6% vs FUN's -44.4%
YUM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 202.2% 10Y total return vs MCD's 158.5%
- PEG 1.70 vs QSR's 3.14
- 22.8% ROA vs FUN's -22.1%, ROIC 48.1% vs 5.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 50.6% revenue growth vs MCD's 1.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (19.0x vs 44.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 32.0% margin vs FUN's -55.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.11 vs FUN's 1.83 | |
| Dividends | 3.1% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs MCD's 2.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +31.6% vs FUN's -44.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 22.8% ROA vs FUN's -22.1%, ROIC 48.1% vs 5.1% |
FUN vs MCD vs QSR vs SBUX vs YUM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FUN vs MCD vs QSR vs SBUX vs YUM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MCD leads in 1 of 6 categories
FUN leads 1 • YUM leads 1 • QSR leads 0 • SBUX leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MCD leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SBUX is the larger business by revenue, generating $37.7B annually — 12.0x FUN's $3.1B. MCD is the more profitable business, keeping 32.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FUN's -55.7%. On growth, YUM holds the edge at +15.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.1B | $26.3B | $9.6B | $37.7B | $8.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$828M | $14.3B | $2.6B | $5.1B | $2.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1.7B | $8.4B | $955M | $1.4B | $1.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$169M | $7.4B | $1.5B | $2.3B | $1.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +73.8% | +57.4% | +33.1% | +20.6% | +45.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -41.4% | +46.1% | +25.1% | +9.0% | +31.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -55.7% | +32.0% | +10.0% | +3.6% | +20.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.4% | +28.1% | +15.8% | +6.2% | +19.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.3% | +3.0% | +7.3% | +5.4% | +15.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -11.7% | +1.6% | +102.1% | -62.3% | +72.2% |
Valuation Metrics
FUN leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 24.9x trailing earnings, MCD trades at a 62% valuation discount to SBUX's 65.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), YUM offers better value at 2.06x vs SBUX's 4.19x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.0B | $202.3B | $26.7B | $121.3B | $43.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $7.1B | $253.2B | $43.2B | $144.7B | $54.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -8.56x | 24.94x | 32.84x | 65.30x | 28.06x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 21.54x | 19.01x | 44.92x | 23.11x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 3.26x | 4.11x | 4.19x | 2.06x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.25x | 18.33x | 17.53x | 27.48x | 19.86x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.74x | 7.81x | 2.83x | 3.26x | 5.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.87x | — | 6.84x | — | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 37.91x | 30.32x | 18.46x | 49.68x | 26.31x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — FUN and YUM each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
QSR delivers a 18.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $-2 for FUN. FUN carries lower financial leverage with a 2.26x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to QSR's 3.41x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MCD scores 7/9 vs SBUX's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.0% | — | +18.4% | — | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -22.1% | +13.9% | +3.8% | +4.2% | +22.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.1% | +19.3% | +8.2% | +17.7% | +48.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.2% | +23.3% | +9.9% | +16.2% | +41.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 | 6 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.26x | — | 3.41x | — | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $5.1B | $50.9B | $16.4B | $23.4B | $11.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $83M | $1.1B | $1.2B | $3.2B | $709M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.2B | $51.9B | $17.6B | $26.6B | $11.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.53x | 7.88x | 3.65x | 6.03x | 5.26x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
YUM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in YUM five years ago would be worth $13,892 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,558 for FUN. Over the past 12 months, SBUX leads with a +31.6% total return vs FUN's -44.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors YUM at 6.3% vs FUN's -19.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +27.1% | -5.7% | +14.8% | +27.5% | +4.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -44.4% | -8.0% | +17.6% | +31.6% | +7.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -48.7% | +2.7% | +16.3% | +5.9% | +20.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.4% | +34.4% | +28.9% | +2.3% | +38.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -37.5% | +158.5% | +126.4% | +119.9% | +202.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -19.9% | +0.9% | +5.2% | +1.9% | +6.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MCD and SBUX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MCD is the less volatile stock with a 0.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FUN's 1.83 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SBUX currently trades 99.0% from its 52-week high vs FUN's 51.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.83x | 0.11x | 0.39x | 0.99x | 0.19x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $38.47 | $341.75 | $81.96 | $107.55 | $169.39 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $12.51 | $282.40 | $61.33 | $77.99 | $137.33 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +51.2% | +83.1% | +94.2% | +99.0% | +92.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.3 | 31.7 | 65.2 | 66.3 | 39.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.6M | 2.9M | 3.2M | 7.6M | 1.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — MCD and QSR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FUN as "Buy", MCD as "Buy", QSR as "Buy", SBUX as "Hold", YUM as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 24.0% upside for MCD (target: $352) vs 1.8% for SBUX (target: $108). For income investors, QSR offers the higher dividend yield at 3.14% vs FUN's 1.56%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $22.88 | $352.25 | $83.71 | $108.38 | $174.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 29 | 62 | 44 | 59 | 51 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.6% | +2.4% | +3.1% | +2.3% | +1.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 26 | 14 | 16 | 8 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.31 | $6.75 | $2.42 | $2.43 | $2.84 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.4% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.3% |
MCD leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). FUN leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
FUN vs MCD vs QSR vs SBUX vs YUM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FUN or MCD or QSR or SBUX or YUM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Six Flags Entertainment Corporation (FUN) is the stronger pick with 50.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 7% for McDonald's Corporation (MCD). McDonald's Corporation (MCD) offers the better valuation at 24. 9x trailing P/E (21. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Six Flags Entertainment Corporation (FUN) a "Buy" — based on 29 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 — FUN or MCD or QSR or SBUX or YUM?
On trailing P/E, McDonald's Corporation (MCD) is the cheapest at 24.
9x versus Starbucks Corporation at 65. 3x. On forward P/E, Restaurant Brands International Inc. is actually cheaper at 19. 0x — 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: Yum! Brands, Inc. wins at 1. 70x versus Restaurant Brands International Inc. 's 3. 14x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FUN or MCD or QSR or SBUX or YUM?
Over the past 5 years, Yum!
Brands, Inc. (YUM) delivered a total return of +38. 9%, compared to -54. 4% for Six Flags Entertainment Corporation (FUN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: YUM returned +202. 2% versus FUN's -37. 5%. 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 — FUN or MCD or QSR or SBUX or YUM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), McDonald's Corporation (MCD) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
11β versus Six Flags Entertainment Corporation's 1. 83β — meaning FUN is approximately 1538% more volatile than MCD relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Six Flags Entertainment Corporation (FUN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 3% for Restaurant Brands International Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FUN or MCD or QSR or SBUX or YUM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Six Flags Entertainment Corporation (FUN) is pulling ahead at 50.
6% versus 1. 7% for McDonald's Corporation (MCD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Yum! Brands, Inc. grew EPS 6. 5% year-over-year, compared to -195. 0% for Six Flags Entertainment Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, FUN leads at 26. 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 — FUN or MCD or QSR or SBUX or YUM?
McDonald's Corporation (MCD) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
7% net margin versus -8. 5% for Six Flags Entertainment Corporation — meaning it keeps 31. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MCD leads at 45. 2% versus 9. 6% for SBUX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FUN leads at 91. 4%, 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 FUN or MCD or QSR or SBUX or YUM 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, Yum! Brands, Inc. (YUM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 70x versus Restaurant Brands International Inc. 's 3. 14x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Restaurant Brands International Inc. (QSR) trades at 19. 0x forward P/E versus 44. 9x for Starbucks Corporation — 25. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MCD: 24. 0% to $352. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — FUN or MCD or QSR or SBUX or YUM?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Restaurant Brands International Inc. (QSR) offers the highest yield at 3. 1%, versus 1. 6% for Six Flags Entertainment Corporation (FUN).
09Is FUN or MCD or QSR or SBUX or YUM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, McDonald's Corporation (MCD) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
11), 2. 4% yield, +158. 5% 10Y return). Six Flags Entertainment Corporation (FUN) 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 (MCD: +158. 5%, FUN: -37. 5%), 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 FUN and MCD and QSR and SBUX and YUM?
Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: FUN is a small-cap high-growth stock; MCD is a large-cap quality compounder stock; QSR is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; SBUX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; YUM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. 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.