Restaurants
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
NATH vs FRSH vs HUBS vs RRGB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Software - Application
Restaurants
NATH vs FRSH vs HUBS vs RRGB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Restaurants | Software - Application | Software - Application | Restaurants |
| Market Cap | $952M | $2.50B | $12.58B | $81M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $158M | $871M | $3.30B | $1.21B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $21M | $180M | $100M | $-23M |
| Gross Margin | 29.4% | 85.0% | 83.7% | 26.8% |
| Operating Margin | 20.1% | 1.8% | 1.9% | 0.2% |
| Forward P/E | 17.3x | 14.3x | 15.2x | — |
| Total Debt | $56M | $67M | $485M | $514M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $28M | $632M | $882M | $20M |
NATH vs FRSH vs HUBS vs RRGB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nathan's Famous, In… (NATH) | 100 | 165.8 | +65.8% |
| Freshworks Inc. (FRSH) | 100 | 20.7 | -79.3% |
| HubSpot, Inc. (HUBS) | 100 | 29.2 | -70.8% |
| Red Robin Gourmet B… (RRGB) | 100 | 16.2 | -83.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NATH vs FRSH vs HUBS vs RRGB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NATH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.52, yield 2.0%
- Beta 0.52, yield 2.0%, current ratio 2.69x
- Beta 0.52 vs RRGB's 2.10
- 2.0% yield; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend
FRSH is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.15, Low D/E 6.4%, current ratio 2.14x
- Better valuation composite
- 20.7% margin vs RRGB's -1.9%
HUBS is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 19.2%, EPS growth 8.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 21.8%
- 469.1% 10Y total return vs NATH's 163.6%
- 19.2% revenue growth vs RRGB's -3.1%
RRGB is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +34.9% vs HUBS's -62.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.2% revenue growth vs RRGB's -3.1% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.7% margin vs RRGB's -1.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.52 vs RRGB's 2.10 | |
| Dividends | 2.0% yield; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +34.9% vs HUBS's -62.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 42.1% ROA vs RRGB's -4.1%, ROIC 227.7% vs 0.5% |
NATH vs FRSH vs HUBS vs RRGB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
NATH vs FRSH vs HUBS vs RRGB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NATH leads in 2 of 6 categories
FRSH leads 1 • HUBS leads 0 • RRGB leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FRSH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HUBS is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.3B annually — 20.9x NATH's $158M. FRSH is the more profitable business, keeping 20.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RRGB's -1.9%. On growth, HUBS holds the edge at +23.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $158M | $871M | $3.3B | $1.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $33M | $41M | $166M | $54M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $21M | $180M | $100M | -$23M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $22M | $254M | $712M | $6M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +29.4% | +85.0% | +83.7% | +26.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +20.1% | +1.8% | +1.9% | +0.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +13.6% | +20.7% | +3.0% | -1.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +14.0% | +29.2% | +21.6% | +0.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.9% | +16.5% | +23.4% | -5.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -31.8% | — | +2.5% | +77.4% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — FRSH and RRGB each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.3x trailing earnings, FRSH trades at a 95% valuation discount to HUBS's 284.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, RRGB's 10.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HUBS's 69.2x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $952M | $2.5B | $12.6B | $81M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $980M | $1.9B | $12.2B | $575M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 17.29x | 14.33x | 284.08x | -2.80x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 14.26x | 15.21x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.33x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 26.18x | 27.13x | 69.24x | 10.66x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 6.43x | 2.98x | 4.02x | 0.07x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 2.57x | 6.29x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 38.07x | 10.18x | 17.77x | 13.00x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — NATH and FRSH each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FRSH delivers a 18.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $19 in annual profit, vs $5 for HUBS. FRSH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.06x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HUBS's 0.23x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FRSH scores 7/9 vs RRGB's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +18.5% | +5.0% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +42.1% | +11.9% | +2.7% | -4.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.3% | +2.0% | +0.4% | +0.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +104.3% | +1.2% | +0.5% | +0.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.06x | 0.23x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $28M | -$566M | -$397M | $494M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $28M | $632M | $882M | $20M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $56M | $67M | $485M | $514M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 11.11x | — | 4753.07x | 0.26x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NATH leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NATH five years ago would be worth $17,213 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,032 for RRGB. Over the past 12 months, RRGB leads with a +34.9% total return vs HUBS's -62.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NATH at 14.6% vs RRGB's -33.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +10.9% | -22.2% | -36.1% | -11.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +7.2% | -36.5% | -62.0% | +34.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +50.5% | -33.0% | -45.1% | -70.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +72.1% | -81.0% | -52.1% | -89.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +163.6% | -81.0% | +469.1% | -94.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.6% | -12.5% | -18.1% | -33.4% |
Risk & Volatility
NATH leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NATH is the less volatile stock with a 0.52 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. NATH currently trades 85.6% from its 52-week high vs HUBS's 35.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.52x | 1.07x | 1.01x | 2.08x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $118.50 | $16.14 | $682.57 | $7.89 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $88.67 | $6.79 | $187.45 | $2.46 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.6% | +55.9% | +35.8% | +46.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.3 | 57.4 | 51.1 | 51.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 24K | 7.8M | 1.5M | 384K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FRSH as "Buy", HUBS as "Buy", RRGB as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 90.7% upside for RRGB (target: $7) vs 25.3% for HUBS (target: $306). NATH is the only dividend payer here at 1.97% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $11.43 | $306.10 | $7.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 18 | 47 | 38 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.0% | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.00 | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +15.5% | +4.0% | 0.0% |
NATH leads in 2 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). FRSH leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
NATH vs FRSH vs HUBS vs RRGB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NATH or FRSH or HUBS or RRGB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, HubSpot, Inc.
(HUBS) is the stronger pick with 19. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 1% for Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. (RRGB). Freshworks Inc. (FRSH) offers the better valuation at 14. 3x trailing P/E (14. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Freshworks Inc. (FRSH) a "Buy" — based on 18 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 — NATH or FRSH or HUBS or RRGB?
On trailing P/E, Freshworks Inc.
(FRSH) is the cheapest at 14. 3x versus HubSpot, Inc. at 284. 1x. On forward P/E, Freshworks Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 3x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NATH or FRSH or HUBS or RRGB?
Over the past 5 years, Nathan's Famous, Inc.
(NATH) delivered a total return of +72. 1%, compared to -89. 7% for Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. (RRGB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HUBS returned +359. 7% versus RRGB's -94. 3%. 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 — NATH or FRSH or HUBS or RRGB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Nathan's Famous, Inc.
(NATH) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 52β versus Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. 's 2. 08β — meaning RRGB is approximately 300% more volatile than NATH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Freshworks Inc. (FRSH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 23% for HubSpot, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NATH or FRSH or HUBS or RRGB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), HubSpot, Inc.
(HUBS) is pulling ahead at 19. 2% versus -3. 1% for Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. (RRGB). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: HubSpot, Inc. grew EPS 863. 0% year-over-year, compared to 22. 3% for Nathan's Famous, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HUBS leads at 21. 8% 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 — NATH or FRSH or HUBS or RRGB?
Freshworks Inc.
(FRSH) is the more profitable company, earning 21. 9% net margin versus -1. 9% for Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. — meaning it keeps 21. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NATH leads at 24. 6% versus 0. 2% for RRGB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FRSH leads at 85. 0%, 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 NATH or FRSH or HUBS or RRGB more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Freshworks Inc.
(FRSH) trades at 14. 3x forward P/E versus 15. 2x for HubSpot, Inc. — 0. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for RRGB: 90. 7% to $7. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NATH or FRSH or HUBS or RRGB?
In this comparison, NATH (2.
0% yield) pays a dividend. FRSH, HUBS, RRGB do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NATH or FRSH or HUBS or RRGB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Nathan's Famous, Inc.
(NATH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 52), 2. 0% yield, +163. 4% 10Y return). Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. (RRGB) carries a higher beta of 2. 08 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NATH: +163. 4%, RRGB: -94. 3%), 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 NATH and FRSH and HUBS and RRGB?
These companies operate in different sectors (NATH (Consumer Cyclical) and FRSH (Technology) and HUBS (Technology) and RRGB (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: NATH is a small-cap deep-value stock; FRSH is a small-cap high-growth stock; HUBS is a mid-cap high-growth stock; RRGB is a small-cap quality compounder stock. NATH pays a dividend while FRSH, HUBS, 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.