Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CAVA scored 57.0, YUM scored 71.3 — YUM leads.
Compare another set
CAVA
CAVA Group, Inc.
Restaurants · Quality-Growth
57
$53.64 · $6.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.3
YUM leads
YUM
Yum! Brands, Inc.
Restaurants · Quality-Growth
71.3
$144.82 · $39.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestYUM18.2x
Fastest growthCAVA+22.4%
Highest qualityYUM88 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueYUM-9%
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)
CAVA
stronger →← stronger
YUM
51
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
88
91
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
69
40
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
60
YUM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CAVA
YUM
$49mC-
FCF
$1.7bC+
+22.4%A-
Rev
+10.3%B
0.62B+
D/E
Negative equity
97.5xD
P/E
18.2xB
4.69D
PEG
1.83C+
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
CAVA
YUM
816% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
9% below
>60%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~4%/yr
-91%
1-yr DCF upside
+2%
-89%
5-yr DCF upside
+9%
-85%
10-yr DCF upside
+21%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CAVA
No notable signals flagged.
YUM
Why this score
Raising its dividend
The companies
CAVACAVA Group, Inc.
Restaurants · $53.64 · beta 1.81
Why now
Restaurants · market cap $6.3b. Down 46% from 52-week high of $98.79 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +22%, comfortably above the S&P median. 24 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $83.67 (implying +56% upside).
Moat
Moat signals from the quantitative card are modest — profitability and capital efficiency are middle-of-pack. The thesis here depends on softer factors (switching costs, brand, distribution, regulatory protection) not captured by the quality-growth screen.
Risk
Trailing P/E 97.5x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 46% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.81 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
YUMYum! Brands, Inc.
Restaurants · $144.82 · beta 0.55
Why now
Restaurants · market cap $39.5b. 15% off the 52-week high of $170.14. Revenue growing +10%, comfortably above the S&P median. 22 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $171.06 (implying +18% upside).
Moat
Net margin 25% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close.
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 CAVA and YUM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 14.3 points in favor of YUM. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityCAVA 51.0 · YUM 87.7YUM +36.7
GrowthCAVA 91.5 · YUM 68.8CAVA +22.7
ValueCAVA 39.7 · YUM 60.1YUM +20.4
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value 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.
Common questions
Is YUM or CAVA the better stock?
YUM scores higher: YUM 71.3, CAVA 57.0 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do YUM and CAVA differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where YUM leads by 37 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are YUM and CAVA scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.