Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 20.6x · EV/EBITDA 12.6x · ROE 186.7%. (1996–2025 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $7.4B | $8.1B | $3.3B | $1.6B | $1.0B | $2.9B | $915M | $1.5B | $2.2B | $2.0B | $2.7B |
| Enterprise Value | $9.0B | $9.8B | $5.3B | $3.8B | $3.3B | $4.9B | $3.3B | $2.8B | $3.7B | $3.3B | $3.8B |
| P/E Ratio → | 20.61 | 21.23 | 21.43 | 15.88 | 8.69 | 21.93 | 37.35 | 9.94 | 17.50 | 12.96 | 13.31 |
| P/S Ratio | 1.37 | 1.51 | 0.75 | 0.39 | 0.27 | 0.86 | 0.30 | 0.48 | 0.70 | 0.62 | 0.82 |
| P/B Ratio | 21.31 | 21.96 | 84.52 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | 17.78 | 19.69 | 14.93 | 22.82 | 10.03 | 10.45 | 6.51 | 34.11 | 12.03 | 9.19 | 9.48 |
| P/OCF | 10.83 | 11.99 | 7.89 | 6.36 | 4.05 | 7.80 | 3.74 | 7.23 | 7.75 | 6.24 | 6.77 |
P/E links to full P/E history page with 30-year chart
Enterprise-value multiples — capital-structure-neutral measures of total business value
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 1.82 | 1.19 | 0.91 | 0.86 | 1.47 | 1.06 | 0.86 | 1.18 | 1.04 | 1.15 |
| EV / EBITDA | 12.56 | 13.66 | 13.15 | 12.06 | 10.13 | 14.03 | 14.54 | 7.28 | 9.80 | — | 7.92 |
| EV / EBIT | 17.63 | 19.14 | 22.90 | 25.91 | 20.34 | 24.34 | 50.71 | 11.80 | 16.14 | 12.68 | 11.77 |
| EV / FCF | — | 23.73 | 23.61 | 52.86 | 32.20 | 17.78 | 23.28 | 61.06 | 20.20 | 15.40 | 13.32 |
Margins and return-on-capital ratios measuring operating efficiency
Full margin charts and quarterly trend are on the Earnings History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 18.2% | 18.2% | 14.2% | 12.1% | 13.1% | 15.1% | 13.3% | 16.2% | 17.5% | 18.0% | 19.0% |
| Operating Margin | 9.5% | 9.5% | 5.2% | 3.5% | 4.2% | 6.0% | 2.0% | 7.2% | 7.2% | -8.1% | 9.7% |
| Net Profit Margin | 7.1% | 7.1% | 3.5% | 2.5% | 3.1% | 3.9% | 0.8% | 4.8% | 4.0% | 4.8% | 6.2% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 186.7% | 186.7% | 394.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| ROA | 14.5% | 14.5% | 6.1% | 4.1% | 4.9% | 5.7% | 1.4% | 11.9% | 9.2% | 10.5% | 13.9% |
| ROIC | 19.1% | 19.1% | 8.7% | 5.4% | 6.5% | 8.3% | 4.1% | 28.5% | 21.1% | -22.8% | 28.0% |
| ROCE | 25.8% | 25.8% | 11.7% | 7.4% | 8.8% | 11.2% | 4.6% | 26.4% | 24.0% | -25.7% | 31.1% |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 4.57 | 4.57 | 50.74 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | 2.36 | 2.36 | 4.99 | 6.91 | 7.02 | 5.85 | 10.67 | 3.25 | 3.99 | — | 2.35 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 4.51 | 49.10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 2.33 | 2.33 | 4.83 | 6.86 | 6.98 | 5.78 | 10.47 | 3.21 | 3.96 | — | 2.29 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 4.05 | 8.67 | 30.05 | 22.18 | 7.33 | 16.77 | 26.95 | 8.17 | 6.21 | 3.84 |
| Interest Coverage | 9.66 | 9.66 | 3.54 | 2.65 | 3.50 | 3.58 | 1.08 | 3.79 | 3.89 | 5.21 | 9.79 |
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 0.31 | 0.31 | 0.38 | 0.34 | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.45 | 0.42 | 0.36 | 0.33 | 0.41 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.23 | 0.17 | 0.20 | 0.22 | 0.29 | 0.25 | 0.20 | 0.17 | 0.25 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.10 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.07 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 2.01 | 1.70 | 1.66 | 1.53 | 1.47 | 1.31 | 2.56 | 2.33 | 2.24 | 2.23 |
| Inventory Turnover | 48.85 | 48.85 | 42.90 | 40.32 | 36.28 | 34.78 | 33.84 | 38.34 | 36.49 | 36.18 | 37.40 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 4.98 | 5.01 | 5.38 | 6.80 | 9.64 | 10.40 | 7.89 | 6.25 | 5.17 | 5.11 |
Earnings, FCF, buyback, and dividend yields — total returns to shareholders
Full dividend history and growth charts are on the Dividend History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 6.3% | 3.9% | 3.2% | 3.6% | 2.8% |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | 0.1% | 0.6% | 0.9% | 1.1% | 235.2% | 38.9% | 55.6% | 46.9% | 36.9% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 4.9% | 4.7% | 4.7% | 6.3% | 11.5% | 4.6% | 2.7% | 10.1% | 5.7% | 7.7% | 7.5% |
| FCF Yield | 5.6% | 5.1% | 6.7% | 4.4% | 10.0% | 9.6% | 15.3% | 2.9% | 8.3% | 10.9% | 10.6% |
| Buyback Yield | 1.2% | 1.1% | 0.8% | 0.3% | 9.9% | 0.1% | 3.5% | 10.9% | 13.8% | 19.0% | 10.7% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 1.2% | 1.1% | 0.8% | 0.3% | 10.0% | 0.2% | 9.8% | 14.8% | 16.9% | 22.6% | 13.4% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $46M | $46M | $45M | $46M | $47M | $39M | $39M | $46M | $51M | $59M |
High leverage and liquidity
According to current market data, Brinker's forward P/E of 15.93 suggests a valuation discount relative to peers like Texas Roadhouse, implying that investors remain skeptical of the company's ability to sustain its recent revenue growth without sacrificing long-term margins to commodity and labor cost pressures.
The PEG ratio of 0.31 appears to signal an undervalued profile, yet this may be misleading if the market anticipates a deceleration in earnings growth following the recent recovery phase. Investors should monitor whether the current P/S of 1.37 can expand as the company demonstrates more consistent operating leverage compared to its casual dining counterparts.
Based on reported figures, Brinker's ROIC has struggled to exceed 6.0% in recent quarters, a performance that significantly lags the double-digit returns generated by more efficient operators like Darden Restaurants, highlighting the inherent drag of a capital-intensive, company-owned restaurant model on overall shareholder value creation.
The persistent gap between ROE and ROIC suggests that the company's returns are heavily influenced by financial leverage rather than pure operational excellence. This reliance on debt to juice equity returns warrants further investigation into whether management can improve unit-level economics to drive organic compounding.
As reported in financial statements, Brinker maintains a negative cash conversion cycle, which, according to recent data, reached -0 days in 2026Q3, indicating that the company effectively utilizes supplier credit to fund its operations, a common but risky strategy in the volatile casual dining sector.
While a negative CCC provides a liquidity buffer, it also suggests that Brinker's ability to manage cash is highly dependent on maintaining favorable payment terms with vendors. Any disruption in these supplier relationships could quickly expose the company's thin liquidity position and necessitate more expensive external financing.
Based on the most recent quarterly filings, Brinker's current ratio of 0.40 indicates that current liabilities significantly outweigh current assets, leaving the company with a very narrow margin of safety to navigate potential operational shocks or sudden spikes in commodity costs within the casual dining environment.
The quick ratio of 0.26 further underscores the company's dependence on ongoing cash flow to meet short-term obligations, as inventory is not a reliable source of immediate liquidity. This structural vulnerability suggests that the company may be susceptible to liquidity stress if guest traffic patterns deviate from current expectations.
Investors frequently misapply the debt-to-equity ratio when evaluating Brinker, as the company's aggressive share repurchase programs have historically distorted equity book value, making the leverage profile appear more volatile than the underlying cash flow generation and lease-adjusted debt obligations would otherwise suggest.
A more appropriate metric for this business model would be lease-adjusted net debt to EBITDA, which accounts for the significant off-balance-sheet commitments inherent in restaurant operations. Relying solely on D/E ratios obscures the true extent of the company's fixed-cost burden and its actual capacity for debt service.
Includes 30+ ratios · 30 years · Updated daily
DCF models, multiple analysis, and analyst estimates.
10-year return with dividends reinvested.
See how regular investing compounds over time.
Compare growth, multiples, and margins vs sector.
Quick answers to the most common questions about buying EAT stock.
Brinker International, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 20.6x. The historical average is 19.8x. This places it at the 57th percentile of its historical range.
Brinker International, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 12.6x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 9.3x.
Brinker International, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 186.7%. This is above the typical threshold of 15-20% considered good for most companies. The historical average is 51.6%.
Based on historical data, Brinker International, Inc. is trading at a P/E of 20.6x. This is at the 57th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Brinker International, Inc. has 18.2% gross margin and 9.5% operating margin.
Brinker International, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 2.4x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.