Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. FLUT scored 32.2, YUM scored 71.3 — YUM leads.
Compare another set
FLUT
Flutter Entertainment plc
Gambling · Quality-Growth
32.2
$79.78 · $13.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
39.1
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
Fastest growthFLUT+15.2%
Highest qualityYUM88 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueFLUT-35%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
FLUT
stronger →← stronger
YUM
29
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
88
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
69
23
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
60
YUM is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
FLUT
YUM
$1.2bC+
FCF
$1.7bC+
+15.2%B+
Rev
+10.3%B
1.34C+
D/E
Negative equity
0.8xB+
P/S
—
0.19A
PEG
1.83C+
—
P/E
18.2xB
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
FLUT
YUM
35% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
9% below
~-1%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~4%/yr
+33%
1-yr DCF upside
+2%
+54%
5-yr DCF upside
+9%
+89%
10-yr DCF upside
+21%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
FLUT
Why this score
Cyclical growth
YUM
Why this score
Raising its dividend
The companies
FLUTFlutter Entertainment plc
Gambling · $79.78 · beta 1.14
Why now
Gambling · market cap $13.8b. Down 69% from 52-week high of $255.26 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +15%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.19 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 32 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $133.06 (implying +67% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Currently unprofitable (margin -5.0%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 69% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. ROE -10% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
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 FLUT and YUM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 39.1 points in favor of YUM. The widest single difference is Quality, where YUM leads by 58.8 points.
QualityFLUT 28.9 · YUM 87.7YUM +58.8
ValueFLUT 23.2 · YUM 60.1YUM +36.9
GrowthFLUT 50.0 · YUM 68.8YUM +18.8
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 FLUT the better stock?
YUM scores higher: YUM 71.3, FLUT 32.2 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 FLUT differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where YUM leads by 59 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. YUM leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are YUM and FLUT 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.