Restaurants
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
KRUS vs SHAK vs TXRH vs WING vs RRGB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Restaurants
Restaurants
Restaurants
Restaurants
KRUS vs SHAK vs TXRH vs WING vs RRGB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Restaurants | Restaurants | Restaurants | Restaurants | Restaurants |
| Market Cap | $671M | $2.79B | $10.41B | $3.67B | $81M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $292M | $1.49B | $6.06B | $709M | $1.21B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-4M | $41M | $415M | $112M | $-23M |
| Gross Margin | 11.0% | 7.5% | 18.7% | 82.6% | 26.8% |
| Operating Margin | -2.4% | 4.3% | 8.2% | 28.0% | 0.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 50.2x | 25.0x | 29.5x | — |
| Total Debt | $170M | $902M | $1.89B | $1.33B | $514M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $47M | $360M | $135M | $239M | $20M |
KRUS vs SHAK vs TXRH vs WING vs RRGB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kura Sushi USA, Inc. (KRUS) | 100 | 385.9 | +285.9% |
| Shake Shack Inc. (SHAK) | 100 | 124.7 | +24.7% |
| Texas Roadhouse, In… (TXRH) | 100 | 304.6 | +204.6% |
| Wingstop Inc. (WING) | 100 | 110.6 | +10.6% |
| Red Robin Gourmet B… (RRGB) | 100 | 26.5 | -73.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: KRUS vs SHAK vs TXRH vs WING vs RRGB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
KRUS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 18.9%, EPS growth 79.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 26.1%
- 18.9% revenue growth vs RRGB's -3.1%
Among these 5 stocks, SHAK doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
TXRH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 5 yrs, beta 0.70, yield 1.7%
- 288.0% 10Y total return vs WING's 5.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, current ratio 0.50x
- Beta 0.70, yield 1.7%, current ratio 0.50x
WING is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.57 vs TXRH's 1.17
- 15.8% margin vs RRGB's -1.9%
- 16.1% ROA vs RRGB's -4.1%, ROIC 46.0% vs 0.5%
RRGB is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +34.9% vs WING's -49.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.9% revenue growth vs RRGB's -3.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (25.0x vs 50.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.8% margin vs RRGB's -1.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs RRGB's 2.10 | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs WING's 0.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +34.9% vs WING's -49.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.1% ROA vs RRGB's -4.1%, ROIC 46.0% vs 0.5% |
KRUS vs SHAK vs TXRH vs WING vs RRGB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
KRUS vs SHAK vs TXRH vs WING vs RRGB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TXRH leads in 3 of 6 categories
WING leads 1 • RRGB leads 1 • KRUS leads 0 • SHAK leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WING leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TXRH is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.1B annually — 20.8x KRUS's $292M. WING is the more profitable business, keeping 15.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RRGB's -1.9%. On growth, SHAK holds the edge at +14.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $292M | $1.5B | $6.1B | $709M | $1.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $8M | $173M | $709M | $225M | $54M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$4M | $41M | $415M | $112M | -$23M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$28M | $16M | $441M | $132M | $6M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +11.0% | +7.5% | +18.7% | +82.6% | +26.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.4% | +4.3% | +8.2% | +28.0% | +0.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -1.4% | +2.8% | +6.8% | +15.8% | -1.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -9.5% | +1.1% | +7.3% | +18.6% | +0.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.0% | +14.3% | +12.8% | +7.4% | -5.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -196.9% | -110.0% | +10.0% | -66.7% | +77.4% |
Valuation Metrics
RRGB leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.7x trailing earnings, WING trades at a 66% valuation discount to SHAK's 63.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TXRH offers better value at 0.38x vs WING's 0.42x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $671M | $2.8B | $10.4B | $3.7B | $81M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $793M | $3.3B | $12.2B | $4.8B | $575M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -351.88x | 63.53x | 25.89x | 21.72x | -2.80x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 50.21x | 25.05x | 29.54x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.38x | 0.42x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 85.45x | 17.31x | 17.15x | 21.93x | 10.66x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.37x | 1.93x | 1.77x | 5.27x | 0.07x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.90x | 5.23x | 7.09x | — | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 49.34x | 30.44x | 34.78x | 13.00x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — KRUS and WING each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TXRH delivers a 37.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $37 in annual profit, vs $-2 for KRUS. KRUS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.74x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SHAK's 1.63x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SHAK scores 7/9 vs TXRH's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -1.7% | +7.6% | +37.4% | — | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.9% | +2.2% | +12.2% | +16.1% | -4.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -1.2% | +6.0% | +14.5% | +46.0% | +0.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -1.4% | +5.4% | +20.1% | +31.0% | +0.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.74x | 1.63x | 1.27x | — | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $123M | $542M | $1.8B | $1.1B | $494M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $47M | $360M | $135M | $239M | $20M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $170M | $902M | $1.9B | $1.3B | $514M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -50.08x | 16.87x | — | 5.43x | 0.26x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TXRH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TXRH five years ago would be worth $16,160 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,032 for RRGB. Over the past 12 months, RRGB leads with a +34.9% total return vs WING's -49.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TXRH at 15.4% vs RRGB's -33.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +3.8% | -17.0% | -7.4% | -47.4% | -11.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -6.9% | -32.1% | -6.2% | -49.6% | +34.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -12.2% | +3.5% | +53.6% | -33.2% | -70.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +57.8% | -22.6% | +61.6% | -2.0% | -89.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +187.1% | +98.2% | +288.0% | +514.9% | -94.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -4.2% | +1.1% | +15.4% | -12.6% | -33.4% |
Risk & Volatility
TXRH leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TXRH is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RRGB's 2.10 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TXRH currently trades 79.0% from its 52-week high vs WING's 34.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.36x | 1.75x | 0.70x | 1.29x | 2.10x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $95.98 | $144.65 | $199.99 | $388.14 | $7.89 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $42.62 | $67.20 | $153.82 | $133.70 | $2.46 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +58.7% | +47.9% | +79.0% | +34.8% | +46.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.5 | 48.0 | 45.7 | 29.4 | 51.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 308K | 1.5M | 983K | 1.3M | 384K |
Analyst Outlook
TXRH leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: KRUS as "Buy", SHAK as "Hold", TXRH as "Hold", WING as "Hold", RRGB as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 119.1% upside for WING (target: $296) vs 21.3% for TXRH (target: $192). For income investors, TXRH offers the higher dividend yield at 1.72% vs WING's 0.86%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $73.40 | $120.89 | $191.64 | $295.50 | $7.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 35 | 43 | 35 | 38 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +1.7% | +0.9% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 5 | 2 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.71 | $1.15 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.4% | +6.0% | 0.0% |
TXRH leads in 3 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). WING leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
KRUS vs SHAK vs TXRH vs WING vs RRGB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is KRUS or SHAK or TXRH or WING or RRGB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Kura Sushi USA, Inc.
(KRUS) is the stronger pick with 18. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. (RRGB). Wingstop Inc. (WING) offers the better valuation at 21. 7x trailing P/E (29. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Kura Sushi USA, Inc. (KRUS) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — KRUS or SHAK or TXRH or WING or RRGB?
On trailing P/E, Wingstop Inc.
(WING) is the cheapest at 21. 7x versus Shake Shack Inc. at 63. 5x. On forward P/E, Texas Roadhouse, Inc. is actually cheaper at 25. 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: Wingstop Inc. wins at 0. 57x versus Texas Roadhouse, Inc. 's 1. 17x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — KRUS or SHAK or TXRH or WING or RRGB?
Over the past 5 years, Texas Roadhouse, Inc.
(TXRH) delivered a total return of +61. 6%, compared to -89. 7% for Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. (RRGB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WING returned +514. 9% versus RRGB's -94. 4%. 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 — KRUS or SHAK or TXRH or WING or RRGB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Texas Roadhouse, Inc.
(TXRH) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 70β versus Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. 's 2. 10β — meaning RRGB is approximately 200% more volatile than TXRH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Kura Sushi USA, Inc. (KRUS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 74% versus 163% for Shake Shack Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — KRUS or SHAK or TXRH or WING or RRGB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Kura Sushi USA, Inc.
(KRUS) is pulling ahead at 18. 9% versus -3. 1% for Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. (RRGB). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Shake Shack Inc. grew EPS 354. 2% year-over-year, compared to -5. 7% for Texas Roadhouse, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, KRUS leads at 26. 1% 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 — KRUS or SHAK or TXRH or WING or RRGB?
Wingstop Inc.
(WING) is the more profitable company, earning 25. 0% net margin versus -1. 9% for Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. — meaning it keeps 25. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WING leads at 27. 6% versus -1. 7% for KRUS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WING leads at 82. 6%, 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 KRUS or SHAK or TXRH or WING or RRGB 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, Wingstop Inc. (WING) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 57x versus Texas Roadhouse, Inc. 's 1. 17x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Texas Roadhouse, Inc. (TXRH) trades at 25. 0x forward P/E versus 50. 2x for Shake Shack Inc. — 25. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for WING: 119. 1% to $295. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — KRUS or SHAK or TXRH or WING or RRGB?
In this comparison, TXRH (1.
7% yield), WING (0. 9% yield) pay a dividend. KRUS, SHAK, RRGB do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is KRUS or SHAK or TXRH or WING or RRGB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Texas Roadhouse, Inc.
(TXRH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 70), 1. 7% yield, +288. 0% 10Y return). Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. (RRGB) carries a higher beta of 2. 10 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (TXRH: +288. 0%, RRGB: -94. 4%), 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 KRUS and SHAK and TXRH and WING and RRGB?
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: KRUS is a small-cap high-growth stock; SHAK is a small-cap high-growth stock; TXRH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; WING is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RRGB is a small-cap quality compounder stock. TXRH, WING pay a dividend while KRUS, SHAK, RRGB 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.