COMPARE · Data as of October 9, 2026

EAT vs PLNT

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. EAT scored 67.4, PLNT scored 66.6 — EAT leads.
Compare another set
EAT
Brinker International, Inc.
Restaurants · Quality-Growth
67.4
$193.87 · $8.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.8
EAT leads
PLNT
Planet Fitness, Inc.
Leisure · Quality-Growth
66.6
$47.98 · $3.6B
fundamentals as of
  • CheapestPLNT16.3x
  • Fastest growthPLNT+12.7%
  • Highest qualityEAT81 / 100
  • Largest discount to fair valuePLNT-20%
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD67.4/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY80.8GROWTH73.4VALUE51.7
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD66.6/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY77.6GROWTH50.0VALUE76.2
EATPLNTQuality80.877.6Growth73.450.0Value51.776.2
cheap & fastrevenue growth →← cheaper (lower multiple)-2%23%11x23xEATPLNT

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.

FCFEAT$558mPLNT$262m
RevEAT+7.9%PLNT+12.7%
P/EEAT17.8xPLNT16.3x
PEGEAT1.70PLNT0.92
EAT
stronger →← stronger
PLNT
81
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
78
73
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
52
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
76
EAT is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
EAT
PLNT
$558mC+
FCF
$262mC
+7.9%B
Rev
+12.7%B+
3.96D
D/E
Negative equity
17.8xB
P/E
16.3xB
1.70C+
PEG
0.92B+
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.
EAT
PLNT
3% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
20% below
~8%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~3%/yr
-10%
1-yr DCF upside
+12%
-3%
5-yr DCF upside
+25%
+8%
10-yr DCF upside
+47%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
EAT
Why this score
  • Buying back stock
  • Durable high returns
PLNT
Why this score
  • Cyclical growth
EATBrinker International, Inc.
Restaurants · $193.87 · beta 1.26
Why now
Restaurants · market cap $8.1b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $254.99 — deep drawdown territory. 22 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $262.59 (implying +35% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 114% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
D/E 3.96 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer.
PLNTPlanet Fitness, Inc.
Leisure · $47.98 · beta 1.04
Why now
Leisure · market cap $3.6b. Down 58% from 52-week high of $114.26 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.92 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $65.31 (implying +36% upside).
Moat
Net margin 17% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. FCF converts 110% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 58% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
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 EAT and PLNT diverge

On the headline score the gap is 0.8 points in favor of EAT. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.

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 EAT or PLNT the better stock?

EAT scores higher: EAT 67.4, PLNT 66.6 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 EAT and PLNT differ most?

The widest gap is value, where PLNT leads by 25 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 EAT and PLNT 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.