COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
BROS vs YUMC
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BROS scored 62.2, YUMC scored 74.0 — YUMC leads.
Compare another set
BROS
Dutch Bros Inc.
62.2
$51.95 · $9.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
11.8
YUMC leads
YUMC
Yum China Holdings, Inc.
74
$48.92 · $16.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestYUMC18.1x
- Fastest growthBROS+29.6%
- Strongest balance sheetYUMC0.38
- Highest qualityYUMC84 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueYUMC-5%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
BROS
stronger →← stronger
YUMC
55
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
84
96
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
75
46
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
64
YUMC is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BROS
YUMC
$95mC-
FCF
$940mC+
+29.6%A-
Rev
+8.8%B
1.24B
D/E
0.38A-
69.3xD
P/E
18.1xB
1.74C+
PEG
1.24B
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
BROS
YUMC
612% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
5% below
>60%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~8%/yr
-89%
1-yr DCF upside
-8%
-86%
5-yr DCF upside
+6%
-80%
10-yr DCF upside
+30%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
BROS
Why this score
- Diluting shareholders
YUMC
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
The companies
BROSDutch Bros Inc.
Why now
Restaurants · market cap $9.1b. Down 30% from 52-week high of $74.65 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +30% — in hypergrowth territory. 24 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $79.79 (implying +54% upside).
Moat
ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 103% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 69.3x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 30% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 2.33 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
YUMCYum China Holdings, Inc.
Why now
Restaurants · market cap $16.7b. 16% off the 52-week high of $58.39. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $62.05 (implying +27% upside).
Moat
ROE 18% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 96% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where BROS and YUMC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.8 points in favor of YUMC. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityBROS 54.6 · YUMC 83.9YUMC +29.3
- GrowthBROS 95.7 · YUMC 75.4BROS +20.3
- ValueBROS 46.1 · YUMC 64.0YUMC +17.9
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.