Seek Returns logo

EAT vs. FLUT: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

Here’s a clear look at EAT and FLUT, comparing key factors like historical performance, profitability, financial strength, growth, dividend, and valuation.

Company Profile

SymbolEATFLUT
Company NameBrinker International, Inc.Flutter Entertainment plc
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorConsumer DiscretionaryConsumer Discretionary
GICS IndustryHotels, Restaurants & LeisureHotels, Restaurants & Leisure
Market Capitalization5.62 billion USD43.43 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateJanuary 6, 1984October 4, 2002
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of EAT and FLUT by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each. Use the tabs to select the desired time period. Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

EAT vs. FLUT: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolEATFLUT
5-Day Price Return-0.13%-2.76%
13-Week Price Return-27.04%-12.67%
26-Week Price Return-16.16%10.85%
52-Week Price Return58.53%5.15%
Month-to-Date Return-0.13%-2.76%
Year-to-Date Return-4.36%-4.43%
10-Day Avg. Volume1.37M2.88M
3-Month Avg. Volume1.36M2.51M
3-Month Volatility35.41%33.68%
Beta1.431.21

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

EAT

197.96%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
84.03%
Q3
40.12%
Median
17.38%
Q1
7.45%
Min
-33.94%

EAT’s Return on Equity of 197.96% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This demonstrates a superior ability to generate profit from shareholder investments, though it could also be inflated by high financial leverage.

FLUT

3.70%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
84.03%
Q3
40.12%
Median
17.38%
Q1
7.45%
Min
-33.94%

FLUT’s Return on Equity of 3.70% is in the lower quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This indicates a less efficient generation of profit from its equity base when compared to its competitors.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

EAT

7.12%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
25.61%
Q3
14.65%
Median
8.66%
Q1
3.36%
Min
-9.83%

EAT’s Net Profit Margin of 7.12% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

FLUT

2.46%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
25.61%
Q3
14.65%
Median
8.66%
Q1
3.36%
Min
-9.83%

Falling into the lower quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, FLUT’s Net Profit Margin of 2.46% indicates weaker profitability. This means the company retains a smaller portion of each dollar in sales as profit compared to its competitors.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

EAT

9.51%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
45.80%
Q3
22.44%
Median
14.98%
Q1
6.59%
Min
-15.28%

EAT’s Operating Profit Margin of 9.51% is around the midpoint for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

FLUT

6.53%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
45.80%
Q3
22.44%
Median
14.98%
Q1
6.59%
Min
-15.28%

FLUT’s Operating Profit Margin of 6.53% is in the lower quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This indicates weaker profitability from core operations, which may stem from inefficiencies or competitive pressures on pricing.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolEATFLUT
Return on Equity (TTM)197.96%3.70%
Return on Assets (TTM)14.81%1.40%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)7.12%2.46%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)9.51%6.53%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)18.25%46.94%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

EAT

0.31

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
2.73
Q3
1.63
Median
1.12
Q1
0.73
Min
0.18

EAT’s Current Ratio of 0.31 falls into the lower quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This indicates a tighter liquidity situation and a more constrained capacity to handle short-term debt than many of its competitors.

FLUT

0.95

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
2.73
Q3
1.63
Median
1.12
Q1
0.73
Min
0.18

FLUT’s Current Ratio of 0.95 aligns with the median group of the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

EAT

1.20

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
11.29
Q3
4.71
Median
1.65
Q1
0.27
Min
0.00

EAT’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 1.20 is typical for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

FLUT

0.97

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
11.29
Q3
4.71
Median
1.65
Q1
0.27
Min
0.00

FLUT’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.97 is typical for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

EAT

9.66

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
21.72
Q3
11.40
Median
4.02
Q1
1.19
Min
-11.84

EAT’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 9.66 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

FLUT

1.02

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
21.72
Q3
11.40
Median
4.02
Q1
1.19
Min
-11.84

In the lower quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, FLUT’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 1.02 indicates a tighter cushion for servicing debt, suggesting less financial flexibility than many of its competitors.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolEATFLUT
Current Ratio (MRQ)0.310.95
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.220.89
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)1.200.97
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)9.661.02

Growth

Revenue Growth

EAT vs. FLUT: A side-by-side comparison of their Revenue Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

EPS Growth

EAT vs. FLUT: A side-by-side comparison of their EPS Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

Dividend

Dividend Yield (TTM)

EAT

0.00%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
6.81%
Q3
2.73%
Median
0.74%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

EAT currently does not pay a dividend, resulting in a yield of 0%. This is a common strategy for growth-focused companies that prioritize reinvesting earnings, though it may be less typical in mature, income-oriented sectors.

FLUT

0.00%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
6.81%
Q3
2.73%
Median
0.74%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

FLUT currently does not pay a dividend, resulting in a yield of 0%. This is a common strategy for growth-focused companies that prioritize reinvesting earnings, though it may be less typical in mature, income-oriented sectors.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

EAT

0.39%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
128.39%
Q3
61.60%
Median
21.91%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

EAT’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 0.39% is within the typical range for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

FLUT

0.00%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
128.39%
Q3
61.60%
Median
21.91%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

FLUT has a Dividend Payout Ratio of 0%, indicating it does not currently pay a dividend. This is a common strategy for growth-oriented companies that reinvest all profits back into the business.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolEATFLUT
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.00%0.00%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)0.39%0.00%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

EAT

14.84

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
56.96
Q3
33.82
Median
21.30
Q1
15.75
Min
6.06

In the lower quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, EAT’s P/E Ratio of 14.84 suggests the stock may be undervalued compared to its peers, potentially presenting an attractive entry point for investors.

FLUT

118.99

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
56.96
Q3
33.82
Median
21.30
Q1
15.75
Min
6.06

At 118.99, FLUT’s P/E Ratio is exceptionally high, exceeding the typical maximum for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This suggests the stock may be significantly overvalued compared to its peers and implies high market expectations that could be difficult to meet.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

EAT

1.06

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
7.19
Q3
3.99
Median
1.93
Q1
1.26
Min
0.17

In the lower quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, EAT’s P/S Ratio of 1.06 indicates its revenue is valued more conservatively than most of its peers. This could present a compelling opportunity if the market has overlooked its sales-generating capabilities.

FLUT

2.92

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
7.19
Q3
3.99
Median
1.93
Q1
1.26
Min
0.17

FLUT’s P/S Ratio of 2.92 aligns with the market consensus for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This suggests its valuation, based on sales, is seen as standard and is on par with its competitors.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

EAT

21.17

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
24.89
Q3
11.60
Median
4.91
Q1
2.29
Min
0.37

EAT’s P/B Ratio of 21.17 is in the upper tier for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This indicates that investors are paying a premium relative to the company’s net assets, a valuation that hinges on its ability to generate superior profits.

FLUT

4.93

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
24.89
Q3
11.60
Median
4.91
Q1
2.29
Min
0.37

FLUT’s P/B Ratio of 4.93 is within the conventional range for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This shows a balanced market view, where the stock’s price is neither at a significant premium nor a discount to the book value of its peers.

EAT vs. FLUT: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry benchmark.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolEATFLUT
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)14.84118.99
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)1.062.92
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)21.174.93
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)13.7452.53