Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. H scored 24.4, YUMC scored 77.1 — YUMC leads.
Compare another set
H
Hyatt Hotels Corporation
Lodging · Quality-Growth
24.4
$161.94 · $15.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
52.7
YUMC leads
YUMC
Yum China Holdings, Inc.
Restaurants · Quality-Growth
77.1
$42.92 · $14.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestYUMC15.3x
Fastest growthYUMC+8.8%
Strongest balance sheetYUMC0.38
Highest qualityYUMC85 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueYUMC-7%
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)
H
stronger →← stronger
YUMC
51
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
85
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
73
6
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
74
YUMC is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
H
YUMC
$252mC
FCF
$940mC+
+6.8%C+
Rev
+8.8%B
1.24B
D/E
0.38A-
199.9xD
P/E
15.3xB+
1.09B+
PEG
0.93B+
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
H
YUMC
245% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
7% below
~50%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~5%/yr
-78%
1-yr DCF upside
+1%
-71%
5-yr DCF upside
+8%
-58%
10-yr DCF upside
+18%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
H
Why this score
Buying back stock
Cyclical growth
YUMC
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
The companies
HHyatt Hotels Corporation
Lodging · $161.94 · beta 1.40
Why now
Lodging · market cap $15.3b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $206.86 — deep drawdown territory. 24 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $196.88 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($346m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 199.9x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Net margin 2.3% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 2% 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.
YUMCYum China Holdings, Inc.
Restaurants · $42.92 · beta 0.06
Why now
Restaurants · market cap $14.5b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $58.39 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.93 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $61.91 (implying +44% upside).
Moat
ROE 18% is above 15% — 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.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
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 H and YUMC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 52.7 points in favor of YUMC. The widest single difference is Value, where YUMC leads by 68.3 points.
ValueH 5.7 · YUMC 74.0YUMC +68.3
QualityH 50.7 · YUMC 84.8YUMC +34.1
GrowthH 50.0 · YUMC 73.0YUMC +23.0
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 YUMC or H the better stock?
YUMC scores higher: YUMC 77.1, H 24.4 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 YUMC and H differ most?
The widest gap is value, where YUMC leads by 68 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. YUMC leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are YUMC and H 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.