YUMC vs YUM

For growth investors, Yum!

Brands, Inc. (YUM) is the stronger pick with 8. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 4. 4% for Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC). Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC) offers the better valuation at 19. 2x trailing P/E (16. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC) a "Buy" — based on 19 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.

On trailing P/E, Yum China Holdings, Inc.

(YUMC) is the cheapest at 19. 2x versus Yum! Brands, Inc. at 28. 3x. On forward P/E, Yum China Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 16. 6x. 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 Yum China Holdings, Inc. 's 3. 27x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Yum!

Brands, Inc. (YUM) delivered a total return of +40. 0%, compared to -17. 3% for Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: YUM returned +200. 9% versus YUMC's +105. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Yum!

Brands, Inc. (YUM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 19β versus Yum China Holdings, Inc. 's 0. 63β — meaning YUMC is approximately 232% more volatile than YUM relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Yum!

Brands, Inc. (YUM) is pulling ahead at 8. 8% versus 4. 4% for Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Yum China Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 6. 8% year-over-year, compared to 6. 5% for Yum! Brands, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, YUMC leads at 7. 2% 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.

Yum!

Brands, Inc. (YUM) is the more profitable company, earning 19. 0% net margin versus 7. 9% for Yum China Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 19. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: YUM leads at 30. 8% versus 12. 4% for YUMC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — YUM leads at 46. 2%, 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.

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 Yum China Holdings, Inc. 's 3. 27x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC) trades at 16. 6x forward P/E versus 23. 3x for Yum! Brands, Inc. — 6. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for YUMC: 22. 7% to $59. 05.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC) offers the highest yield at 2. 0%, versus 1. 8% for Yum! Brands, Inc. (YUM).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Yum!

Brands, Inc. (YUM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 19), 1. 8% yield, +200. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (YUM: +200. 9%, YUMC: +105. 5%), 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.

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.

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.