Restaurants
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
RICK vs AMZN vs MSFT vs PLAY vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Software - Infrastructure
Entertainment
Consumer Electronics
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Diversified
RICK vs AMZN vs MSFT vs PLAY vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Restaurants | Specialty Retail | Software - Infrastructure | Entertainment | Consumer Electronics | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $216M | $2.63T | $2.82T | $416M | $4.38T | $341.71B | $908.57B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $282M | $742.78B | $318.27B | $2.09B | $451.44B | $49.28B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-7M | $90.80B | $125.22B | $-65M | $122.58B | $13.70B | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 55.2% | 50.6% | 68.3% | 66.8% | 47.9% | 61.7% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | 12.3% | 11.5% | 46.8% | 4.3% | 32.6% | 29.3% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | 4.6x | 27.8x | 22.6x | 94.6x | 34.0x | 24.3x | 14.6x |
| Total Debt | $266M | $152.99B | $112.18B | $3.17B | $112.38B | $45.49B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $34M | $86.81B | $30.24B | $17M | $35.93B | $10.27B | $343.34B |
RICK vs AMZN vs MSFT vs PLAY vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| RCI Hospitality Hol… (RICK) | 100 | 204.0 | +104.0% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 177.2 | +77.2% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 186.4 | +86.4% |
| Dave & Buster's Ent… (PLAY) | 100 | 89.6 | -10.4% |
| Apple Inc. (AAPL) | 100 | 326.8 | +226.8% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 177.7 | +77.7% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 345.8 | +245.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RICK vs AMZN vs MSFT vs PLAY vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RICK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (4.6x vs 24.3x)
AMZN is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 12.4%, EPS growth 29.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.7%
MSFT has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.88, Low D/E 32.7%, current ratio 1.35x
- 14.9% revenue growth vs RICK's -5.5%
- 39.3% margin vs PLAY's -3.1%
In this particular matchup, PLAY is outpaced on most metrics by others in the set.
AAPL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 11.9% 10Y total return vs MSFT's 7.1%
- +52.1% vs PLAY's -62.7%
- 34.0% ROA vs PLAY's -1.6%, ROIC 67.4% vs 2.4%
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 2.6% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs RICK's 1.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.87, yield 1.8%
- PEG 0.83 vs KO's 2.17
- Beta 0.87, yield 1.8%, current ratio 0.52x
- Beta 0.87 vs PLAY's 1.80, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.9% revenue growth vs RICK's -5.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (4.6x vs 24.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs PLAY's -3.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.87 vs PLAY's 1.80, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs RICK's 1.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +52.1% vs PLAY's -62.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 34.0% ROA vs PLAY's -1.6%, ROIC 67.4% vs 2.4% |
RICK vs AMZN vs MSFT vs PLAY vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
RICK vs AMZN vs MSFT vs PLAY vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 7 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSFT leads in 1 of 6 categories
RICK leads 1 • AAPL leads 1 • JPM leads 1 • KO leads 1 • AMZN leads 0 • PLAY 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 — 2637.5x RICK's $282M. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PLAY's -3.1%. On growth, MSFT holds the edge at +18.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $282M | $742.8B | $318.3B | $2.1B | $451.4B | $49.3B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $51M | $155.9B | $192.6B | $377M | $160.0B | $15.5B | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$7M | $90.8B | $125.2B | -$65M | $122.6B | $13.7B | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $39M | -$2.5B | $72.9B | -$33M | $129.2B | $12.6B | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +55.2% | +50.6% | +68.3% | +66.8% | +47.9% | +61.7% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +12.3% | +11.5% | +46.8% | +4.3% | +32.6% | +29.3% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.3% | +12.2% | +39.3% | -3.1% | +27.2% | +27.8% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +14.0% | -0.3% | +22.9% | -1.6% | +28.6% | +25.5% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.3% | +16.6% | +18.3% | -1.5% | +16.6% | +12.1% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -111.1% | +74.8% | +23.4% | -74.2% | +21.8% | +18.2% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
RICK leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.2x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 59% valuation discount to AAPL's 39.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.92x vs KO's 2.34x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $216M | $2.63T | $2.82T | $416M | $4.38T | $341.7B | $908.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $449M | $2.69T | $2.90T | $3.6B | $4.45T | $376.9B | $1.51T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 22.98x | 34.09x | 27.82x | -8.54x | 39.95x | 26.12x | 16.22x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 4.63x | 27.78x | 22.58x | 94.62x | 34.04x | 24.27x | 14.60x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.22x | 1.48x | — | 2.24x | 2.34x | 0.92x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.75x | 18.49x | 17.83x | 9.27x | 30.75x | 25.45x | 18.52x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.77x | 3.67x | 10.00x | 0.20x | 10.51x | 7.13x | 3.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.96x | 6.44x | 8.25x | 4.54x | 60.65x | 9.99x | 2.51x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.19x | 341.55x | 39.36x | — | 44.30x | 64.52x | 9.01x |
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 $-53 for PLAY. MSFT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.33x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PLAY's 34.71x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AAPL scores 8/9 vs JPM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.6% | +23.3% | +33.1% | -53.1% | +146.7% | +41.1% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.1% | +11.5% | +19.2% | -1.6% | +34.0% | +13.1% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.5% | +14.7% | +24.9% | +2.4% | +67.4% | +15.8% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.8% | +15.3% | +29.7% | +2.9% | +69.6% | +17.3% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.02x | 0.37x | 0.33x | 34.71x | 1.52x | 1.33x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $233M | $66.2B | $81.9B | $3.1B | $76.4B | $35.2B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $34M | $86.8B | $30.2B | $17M | $35.9B | $10.3B | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $266M | $153.0B | $112.2B | $3.2B | $112.4B | $45.5B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.39x | 39.96x | 55.65x | 0.46x | — | 10.70x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $23,548 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,012 for PLAY. Over the past 12 months, AAPL leads with a +52.1% total return vs PLAY's -62.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.7% vs PLAY's -34.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +21.3% | +7.9% | -19.4% | -29.9% | +10.2% | +16.4% | +0.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -27.7% | +15.0% | -20.3% | -62.7% | +52.1% | +17.7% | +20.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -62.3% | +94.3% | +15.1% | -71.6% | +62.7% | +39.3% | +138.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -53.5% | +40.2% | +52.0% | -69.9% | +132.1% | +65.3% | +135.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +188.5% | +584.6% | +705.9% | -73.0% | +1188.7% | +115.0% | +481.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -27.7% | +24.8% | +4.8% | -34.3% | +17.6% | +11.7% | +33.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — KO and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.23 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PLAY's 1.80 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 96.2% from its 52-week high vs PLAY's 33.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.33x | 1.46x | 0.88x | 1.81x | 0.88x | -0.24x | 0.87x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $41.37 | $278.56 | $555.45 | $35.53 | $317.40 | $84.04 | $338.09 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $20.76 | $197.28 | $356.28 | $9.65 | $195.07 | $65.35 | $269.72 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +68.3% | +87.7% | +68.3% | +33.6% | +93.9% | +94.5% | +96.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 67.2 | 36.9 | 34.6 | 44.2 | 48.9 | 49.2 | 72.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 47K | 43.7M | 34.8M | 1.8M | 44.2M | 13.6M | 7.4M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RICK as "Buy", AMZN as "Buy", MSFT as "Buy", PLAY as "Buy", AAPL as "Buy", KO as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 246.7% upside for RICK (target: $98) vs 4.5% for JPM (target: $340). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.56% vs AAPL's 0.34%.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $98.00 | $307.77 | $551.96 | $17.33 | $326.47 | $86.13 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 3 | 94 | 82 | 20 | 110 | 48 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.0% | — | +0.9% | — | +0.3% | +2.6% | +1.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 7 | — | 21 | 0 | 13 | 56 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.28 | — | $3.23 | — | $1.03 | $2.04 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.5% | 0.0% | +0.7% | +0.4% | +2.1% | +0.2% | +3.8% |
MSFT leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). RICK leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
RICK vs AMZN vs MSFT vs PLAY vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RICK or AMZN or MSFT or PLAY or AAPL or KO or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger pick with 14.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 5% for RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc. (RICK). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 2x trailing P/E (14. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc. (RICK) a "Buy" — based on 3 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 — RICK or AMZN or MSFT or PLAY or AAPL or KO or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 2x versus Apple Inc. at 39. 9x. On forward P/E, RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 4. 6x — 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: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 83x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 17x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RICK or AMZN or MSFT or PLAY or AAPL or KO or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +135. 5%, compared to -69. 9% for Dave & Buster's Entertainment, Inc. (PLAY). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AAPL returned +1189% versus PLAY's -73. 0%. 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 — RICK or AMZN or MSFT or PLAY or AAPL or KO or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
24β versus Dave & Buster's Entertainment, Inc. 's 1. 81β — meaning PLAY is approximately -865% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 33% versus 35% for Dave & Buster's Entertainment, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RICK or AMZN or MSFT or PLAY or AAPL or KO or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is pulling ahead at 14.
9% versus -5. 5% for RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc. (RICK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 272. 7% year-over-year, compared to -195. 9% for Dave & Buster's Entertainment, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MSFT leads at 12. 4% 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 — RICK or AMZN or MSFT or PLAY or AAPL or KO or JPM?
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 36.
1% net margin versus -2. 3% for Dave & Buster's Entertainment, 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 5. 0% for PLAY. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PLAY leads at 85. 7%, 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 RICK or AMZN or MSFT or PLAY or AAPL or KO or JPM 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 83x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 17x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc. (RICK) trades at 4. 6x forward P/E versus 94. 6x for Dave & Buster's Entertainment, Inc. — 90. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for RICK: 246. 7% to $98. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — RICK or AMZN or MSFT or PLAY or AAPL or KO or JPM?
In this comparison, KO (2.
6% yield), JPM (1. 8% yield), RICK (1. 0% yield), MSFT (0. 9% yield), AAPL (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. AMZN, PLAY do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RICK or AMZN or MSFT or PLAY or AAPL or KO or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
24), 2. 6% yield, +115. 0% 10Y return). Dave & Buster's Entertainment, Inc. (PLAY) carries a higher beta of 1. 81 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +115. 0%, PLAY: -73. 0%), 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 RICK and AMZN and MSFT and PLAY and AAPL and KO and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (RICK (Consumer Cyclical) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical) and MSFT (Technology) and PLAY (Communication Services) and AAPL (Technology) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: RICK is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; PLAY is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AAPL is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. RICK, MSFT, KO, JPM pay a dividend while AMZN, PLAY, 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.