REIT - Retail
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NNN vs MCD vs YUM vs O vs QSR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Restaurants
Restaurants
REIT - Retail
Restaurants
NNN vs MCD vs YUM vs O vs QSR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | REIT - Retail | Restaurants | Restaurants | REIT - Retail | Restaurants |
| Market Cap | $8.47B | $201.63B | $43.48B | $57.62B | $27.42B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $936M | $27.45B | $8.48B | $5.92B | $9.59B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $387M | $8.68B | $1.74B | $800M | $955M |
| Gross Margin | 81.4% | 44.1% | 45.7% | 68.6% | 33.1% |
| Operating Margin | 63.3% | 46.3% | 31.5% | 29.3% | 25.1% |
| Forward P/E | 21.7x | 21.5x | 23.3x | 37.1x | 19.5x |
| Total Debt | $4.82B | $54.81B | $11.91B | $32.85B | $17.58B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $774M | $709M | $435M | $1.16B |
NNN vs MCD vs YUM vs O vs QSR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| NNN REIT, Inc. (NNN) | 100 | 141.8 | +41.8% |
| McDonald's Corporat… (MCD) | 100 | 152.2 | +52.2% |
| Yum! Brands, Inc. (YUM) | 100 | 175.3 | +75.3% |
| Realty Income Corpo… (O) | 100 | 115.4 | +15.4% |
| Restaurant Brands I… (QSR) | 100 | 145.1 | +45.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NNN vs MCD vs YUM vs O vs QSR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NNN has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in quality and dividends.
- 41.4% margin vs QSR's 10.0%
- 5.3% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs MCD's 2.5%
Among these 5 stocks, MCD doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
YUM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- 200.9% 10Y total return vs MCD's 157.7%
- PEG 1.71 vs MCD's 2.81
- Lower P/E (23.3x vs 37.1x), PEG 1.71 vs 71.28
- 22.8% ROA vs O's 1.1%, ROIC 48.1% vs 1.8%
O is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.09, yield 5.2%
- Rev growth 9.1%, EPS growth 19.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 19.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.09, Low D/E 81.9%, current ratio 0.51x
- Beta 0.09, yield 5.2%, current ratio 0.51x
QSR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth and momentum.
- 12.2% revenue growth vs MCD's 3.7%
- +20.3% vs MCD's -8.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 12.2% revenue growth vs MCD's 3.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (23.3x vs 37.1x), PEG 1.71 vs 71.28 | |
| Quality / Margins | 41.4% margin vs QSR's 10.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.09 vs QSR's 0.39, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 5.3% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs MCD's 2.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +20.3% vs MCD's -8.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 22.8% ROA vs O's 1.1%, ROIC 48.1% vs 1.8% |
NNN vs MCD vs YUM vs O vs QSR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NNN vs MCD vs YUM vs O vs QSR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NNN leads in 2 of 6 categories
YUM leads 2 • MCD leads 0 • O leads 0 • QSR leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NNN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MCD is the larger business by revenue, generating $27.4B annually — 29.3x NNN's $936M. NNN is the more profitable business, keeping 41.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to QSR's 10.0%. On growth, YUM holds the edge at +15.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $936M | $27.4B | $8.5B | $5.9B | $9.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $867M | $14.4B | $2.8B | $4.2B | $2.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $387M | $8.7B | $1.7B | $800M | $955M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $464M | $7.2B | $1.6B | $4.0B | $1.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +81.4% | +44.1% | +45.7% | +68.6% | +33.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +63.3% | +46.3% | +31.5% | +29.3% | +25.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +41.4% | +31.6% | +20.5% | +13.5% | +10.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +49.6% | +26.2% | +19.4% | +67.1% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.1% | +9.4% | +15.2% | +12.2% | +7.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.0% | +6.9% | +72.2% | -103.6% | +102.1% |
Valuation Metrics
NNN leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.5x trailing earnings, NNN trades at a 59% valuation discount to O's 52.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MCD offers better value at 1.74x vs O's 71.28x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.5B | $201.6B | $43.5B | $57.6B | $27.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $13.3B | $255.7B | $54.7B | $90.0B | $43.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 21.50x | 23.74x | 28.29x | 52.81x | 33.68x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 21.69x | 21.51x | 23.30x | 37.13x | 19.50x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.93x | 1.74x | 2.08x | 71.28x | 4.21x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.85x | 17.57x | 19.98x | 21.96x | 17.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 9.14x | 7.50x | 5.29x | 10.02x | 2.91x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.90x | — | — | 1.39x | 7.01x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 12.69x | 28.06x | 26.53x | 14.91x | 18.93x |
Profitability & Efficiency
YUM leads this category, winning 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 O. O carries lower financial leverage with a 0.82x 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 NNN's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.8% | — | — | +2.0% | +18.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.1% | +14.5% | +22.8% | +1.1% | +3.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.8% | +18.7% | +48.1% | +1.8% | +8.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.4% | +23.3% | +41.7% | +2.4% | +9.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.09x | — | — | 0.82x | 3.41x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.8B | $54.0B | $11.2B | $32.4B | $16.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $774M | $709M | $435M | $1.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.8B | $54.8B | $11.9B | $32.9B | $17.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.93x | 6.09x | 5.26x | — | 3.65x |
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 $14,002 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,498 for NNN. Over the past 12 months, QSR leads with a +20.3% total return vs MCD's -8.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors YUM at 6.6% vs MCD's 0.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +15.6% | -5.8% | +5.0% | +9.7% | +17.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +12.4% | -8.6% | +7.1% | +14.6% | +20.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +15.1% | +2.5% | +21.1% | +13.6% | +19.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +15.0% | +34.3% | +40.0% | +16.9% | +30.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +37.8% | +157.7% | +200.9% | +45.1% | +132.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +4.8% | +0.8% | +6.6% | +4.3% | +6.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NNN and O each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
O is the less volatile stock with a 0.09 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than QSR's 0.39 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NNN currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs MCD's 83.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.15x | 0.11x | 0.19x | 0.09x | 0.39x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $46.03 | $341.75 | $169.39 | $67.94 | $81.96 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $38.90 | $282.15 | $137.33 | $54.38 | $61.33 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.7% | +83.0% | +92.9% | +90.9% | +96.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.4 | 30.9 | 44.9 | 53.9 | 47.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.5M | 3.0M | 1.6M | 5.6M | 3.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NNN and MCD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NNN as "Hold", MCD as "Buy", YUM as "Hold", O as "Hold", QSR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 24.2% upside for MCD (target: $352) vs 3.5% for NNN (target: $46). For income investors, NNN offers the higher dividend yield at 5.30% vs YUM's 1.80%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $46.06 | $352.25 | $174.38 | $65.25 | $83.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 29 | 62 | 51 | 34 | 44 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +5.3% | +2.5% | +1.8% | +5.2% | +3.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 9 | 27 | 8 | 14 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.36 | $7.14 | $2.84 | $3.23 | $2.42 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.0% | +1.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
NNN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). YUM leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 2 tied.
NNN vs MCD vs YUM vs O vs QSR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NNN or MCD or YUM or O or QSR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Restaurant Brands International Inc.
(QSR) is the stronger pick with 12. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 7% for McDonald's Corporation (MCD). NNN REIT, Inc. (NNN) offers the better valuation at 21. 5x trailing P/E (21. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate McDonald's Corporation (MCD) a "Buy" — based on 62 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 — NNN or MCD or YUM or O or QSR?
On trailing P/E, NNN REIT, Inc.
(NNN) is the cheapest at 21. 5x versus Realty Income Corporation at 52. 8x. On forward P/E, Restaurant Brands International Inc. is actually cheaper at 19. 5x — 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. 71x versus Realty Income Corporation's 71. 28x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NNN or MCD or YUM or O or QSR?
Over the past 5 years, Yum!
Brands, Inc. (YUM) delivered a total return of +40. 0%, compared to +15. 0% for NNN REIT, Inc. (NNN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: YUM returned +200. 9% versus NNN's +37. 8%. 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 — NNN or MCD or YUM or O or QSR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Realty Income Corporation (O) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
09β versus Restaurant Brands International Inc. 's 0. 39β — meaning QSR is approximately 334% more volatile than O relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Realty Income Corporation (O) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 82% versus 3% for Restaurant Brands International Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NNN or MCD or YUM or O or QSR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Restaurant Brands International Inc.
(QSR) is pulling ahead at 12. 2% versus 3. 7% for McDonald's Corporation (MCD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Realty Income Corporation grew EPS 19. 4% year-over-year, compared to -26. 1% for Restaurant Brands International Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, O leads at 19. 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 — NNN or MCD or YUM or O or QSR?
NNN REIT, Inc.
(NNN) is the more profitable company, earning 42. 1% net margin versus 8. 2% for Restaurant Brands International Inc. — meaning it keeps 42. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NNN leads at 61. 5% versus 23. 7% for QSR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — O leads at 89. 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 NNN or MCD or YUM or O or QSR 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. 71x versus Realty Income Corporation's 71. 28x. 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. 5x forward P/E versus 37. 1x for Realty Income Corporation — 17. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MCD: 24. 2% to $352. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — NNN or MCD or YUM or O or QSR?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
NNN REIT, Inc. (NNN) offers the highest yield at 5. 3%, versus 1. 8% for Yum! Brands, Inc. (YUM).
09Is NNN or MCD or YUM or O or QSR 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. 5% yield, +157. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MCD: +157. 7%, QSR: +132. 2%), 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 NNN and MCD and YUM and O and QSR?
These companies operate in different sectors (NNN (Real Estate) and MCD (Consumer Cyclical) and YUM (Consumer Cyclical) and O (Real Estate) and QSR (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: NNN is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MCD is a large-cap quality compounder stock; YUM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; O is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; QSR is a mid-cap income-oriented 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.