Restaurants
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
VENU vs SBUX vs JPM vs EAT vs BAC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Restaurants
Banks - Diversified
Restaurants
Banks - Diversified
VENU vs SBUX vs JPM vs EAT vs BAC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Restaurants | Restaurants | Banks - Diversified | Restaurants | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $146M | $117.43B | $896.00B | $6.83B | $422.78B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $15M | $37.70B | $280.33B | $5.73B | $191.57B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-40M | $1.37B | $57.05B | $463M | $30.51B |
| Gross Margin | -6.4% | 20.6% | 60.0% | 46.0% | 56.1% |
| Operating Margin | -302.8% | 9.0% | 25.9% | 10.4% | 19.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | 43.1x | 14.4x | 14.8x | 12.6x |
| Total Debt | $107M | $26.61B | $942.38B | $1.69B | $365.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $41M | $3.22B | $343.34B | $19M | $231.84B |
VENU vs SBUX vs JPM vs EAT vs BAC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 24 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Venu Holding Corpor… (VENU) | 100 | 31.7 | -68.3% |
| Starbucks Corporati… (SBUX) | 100 | 100.6 | +0.6% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 128.4 | +28.4% |
| Brinker Internation… (EAT) | 100 | 120.5 | +20.5% |
| Bank of America Cor… (BAC) | 100 | 117.9 | +17.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: VENU vs SBUX vs JPM vs EAT vs BAC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, VENU doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
SBUX has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 16 yrs, beta 0.74, yield 2.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.74, current ratio 0.72x
- Beta 0.74, yield 2.4%, current ratio 0.72x
- Beta 0.74 vs VENU's 1.79
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and bank quality.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs EAT's 256.1%
- NIM 2.2% vs BAC's 1.8%
- 20.4% margin vs VENU's -262.7%
EAT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Rev growth 21.9%, EPS growth 144.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 12.3%
- PEG 0.22 vs SBUX's 2.77
- 21.9% revenue growth vs BAC's -0.5%
- 17.0% ROA vs VENU's -11.5%, ROIC 19.1% vs -20.7%
BAC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value and momentum.
- Lower P/E (12.6x vs 43.1x), PEG 0.82 vs 2.77
- +28.1% vs VENU's -68.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 21.9% revenue growth vs BAC's -0.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.6x vs 43.1x), PEG 0.82 vs 2.77 | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs VENU's -262.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.74 vs VENU's 1.79 | |
| Dividends | 2.4% yield, 16-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +28.1% vs VENU's -68.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 17.0% ROA vs VENU's -11.5%, ROIC 19.1% vs -20.7% |
VENU vs SBUX vs JPM vs EAT vs BAC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
VENU vs SBUX vs JPM vs EAT vs BAC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EAT leads in 3 of 6 categories
JPM leads 1 • SBUX leads 1 • VENU leads 0 • BAC leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 18463.9x VENU's $15M. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 20.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to VENU's -2.6%. On growth, VENU holds the edge at +11.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $15M | $37.7B | $280.3B | $5.7B | $191.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$39M | $5.1B | $81.4B | $819M | $40.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$40M | $1.4B | $57.0B | $463M | $30.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$177M | $2.3B | $100.9B | $504M | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -6.4% | +20.6% | +60.0% | +46.0% | +56.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -3.0% | +9.0% | +25.9% | +10.4% | +19.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.6% | +3.6% | +20.4% | +8.1% | +15.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -11.7% | +6.2% | +36.0% | +8.8% | +6.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.5% | +5.4% | — | +3.2% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +39.6% | -62.3% | +16.0% | +12.1% | +18.3% |
Valuation Metrics
EAT leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.7x trailing earnings, BAC trades at a 77% valuation discount to SBUX's 63.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), EAT offers better value at 0.28x vs SBUX's 4.06x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $146M | $117.4B | $896.0B | $6.8B | $422.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $212M | $140.8B | $1.50T | $8.5B | $556.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3.11x | 63.21x | 16.00x | 19.15x | 14.66x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 43.10x | 14.40x | 14.80x | 12.56x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.06x | 0.90x | 0.28x | 0.95x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 26.75x | 18.36x | 11.84x | 13.92x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 8.17x | 3.16x | 3.20x | 1.27x | 2.21x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.63x | — | 2.47x | 19.80x | 1.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 48.09x | 8.88x | 16.52x | 33.52x |
Profitability & Efficiency
EAT leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
EAT delivers a 123.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $123 in annual profit, vs $-19 for VENU. VENU carries lower financial leverage with a 0.54x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to EAT's 4.57x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), EAT scores 7/9 vs SBUX's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -18.7% | — | +15.9% | +123.4% | +10.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -11.5% | +4.2% | +1.3% | +17.0% | +0.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -20.7% | +17.7% | +4.5% | +19.1% | +3.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -22.7% | +16.2% | +8.9% | +25.8% | +4.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.54x | — | 2.60x | 4.57x | 1.21x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $66M | $23.4B | $599.0B | $1.7B | $134.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $41M | $3.2B | $343.3B | $19M | $231.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $107M | $26.6B | $942.4B | $1.7B | $365.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -4.98x | 6.03x | 0.74x | 18.61x | 0.48x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
EAT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in EAT five years ago would be worth $26,723 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,379 for VENU. Over the past 12 months, BAC leads with a +28.1% total return vs VENU's -68.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EAT at 61.5% vs VENU's -30.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -57.1% | +24.2% | -0.5% | +5.1% | +1.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -68.1% | +11.9% | +21.8% | -9.6% | +28.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.2% | +11.9% | +138.2% | +321.3% | +103.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.2% | +1.5% | +118.2% | +167.2% | +47.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.2% | +119.9% | +465.8% | +256.1% | +368.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -30.3% | +3.8% | +33.6% | +61.5% | +26.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SBUX and BAC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SBUX is the less volatile stock with a 0.74 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than VENU's 1.79 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BAC currently trades 97.3% from its 52-week high vs VENU's 18.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.79x | 0.74x | 0.94x | 1.01x | 0.86x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $18.17 | $108.86 | $337.25 | $187.12 | $57.55 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.06 | $77.99 | $262.71 | $100.30 | $43.66 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +18.8% | +94.7% | +95.1% | +85.1% | +97.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.2 | 56.5 | 59.1 | 64.2 | 68.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 296K | 7.3M | 7.0M | 1.1M | 31.7M |
Analyst Outlook
SBUX leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SBUX as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", EAT as "Buy", BAC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 15.8% upside for EAT (target: $184) vs 5.3% for SBUX (target: $109). For income investors, SBUX offers the higher dividend yield at 2.36% vs JPM's 1.86%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $108.50 | $339.75 | $184.46 | $61.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 59 | 61 | 47 | 54 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.4% | +1.9% | — | +2.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 16 | 15 | 0 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.43 | $5.95 | — | $1.27 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.9% | +1.3% | +5.1% |
EAT leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). JPM leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
VENU vs SBUX vs JPM vs EAT vs BAC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is VENU or SBUX or JPM or EAT or BAC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Brinker International, Inc.
(EAT) is the stronger pick with 21. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 5% for Bank of America Corporation (BAC). Bank of America Corporation (BAC) offers the better valuation at 14. 7x trailing P/E (12. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Starbucks Corporation (SBUX) a "Buy" — based on 59 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 — VENU or SBUX or JPM or EAT or BAC?
On trailing P/E, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the cheapest at 14.
7x versus Starbucks Corporation at 63. 2x. On forward P/E, Bank of America Corporation is actually cheaper at 12. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Brinker International, Inc. wins at 0. 22x versus Starbucks Corporation's 2. 77x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — VENU or SBUX or JPM or EAT or BAC?
Over the past 5 years, Brinker International, Inc.
(EAT) delivered a total return of +167. 2%, compared to -66. 2% for Venu Holding Corporation (VENU). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus VENU's -66. 2%. 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 — VENU or SBUX or JPM or EAT or BAC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Starbucks Corporation (SBUX) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
74β versus Venu Holding Corporation's 1. 79β — meaning VENU is approximately 143% more volatile than SBUX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Venu Holding Corporation (VENU) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 54% versus 5% for Brinker International, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — VENU or SBUX or JPM or EAT or BAC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Brinker International, Inc.
(EAT) is pulling ahead at 21. 9% versus -0. 5% for Bank of America Corporation (BAC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Brinker International, Inc. grew EPS 144. 7% year-over-year, compared to -50. 8% for Starbucks Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, VENU leads at 27. 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 — VENU or SBUX or JPM or EAT or BAC?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus -246. 4% for Venu Holding Corporation — meaning it keeps 20. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 26. 0% versus -296. 3% for VENU. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JPM leads at 59. 9%, 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 VENU or SBUX or JPM or EAT or BAC 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, Brinker International, Inc. (EAT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 22x versus Starbucks Corporation's 2. 77x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) trades at 12. 6x forward P/E versus 43. 1x for Starbucks Corporation — 30. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EAT: 15. 8% to $184. 46.
08Which pays a better dividend — VENU or SBUX or JPM or EAT or BAC?
In this comparison, SBUX (2.
4% yield), BAC (2. 3% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. VENU, EAT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is VENU or SBUX or JPM or EAT or BAC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
86), 2. 3% yield, +368. 2% 10Y return). Venu Holding Corporation (VENU) carries a higher beta of 1. 79 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (BAC: +368. 2%, VENU: -66. 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 VENU and SBUX and JPM and EAT and BAC?
These companies operate in different sectors (VENU (Consumer Cyclical) and SBUX (Consumer Cyclical) and JPM (Financial Services) and EAT (Consumer Cyclical) and BAC (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: VENU is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SBUX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; EAT is a small-cap high-growth stock; BAC is a large-cap deep-value stock. SBUX, JPM, BAC pay a dividend while VENU, EAT 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.