COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026

MCD vs YUMC

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MCD scored 56.3, YUMC scored 74.0 — YUMC leads.
Compare another set
MCD
McDonald's Corporation
Restaurants · Quality-Growth
56.3
$272.54 · $192.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
17.7
YUMC leads
YUMC
Yum China Holdings, Inc.
Restaurants · Quality-Growth
74
$48.92 · $16.7B
fundamentals as of
  • CheapestYUMC18.1x
  • Fastest growthYUMC+8.8%
  • Highest qualityYUMC84 / 100
  • Largest discount to fair valueYUMC-5%
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD56.3/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY76.7GROWTH65.9VALUE35.3
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD74.0/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY83.9GROWTH75.4VALUE64.0
MCDYUMCQuality76.783.9Growth65.975.4Value35.364.0
cheap & fastrevenue growth →← cheaper (lower multiple)-4%19%13x27xMCDYUMC

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.

FCFMCD$7.8bYUMC$940m
RevMCD+6.3%YUMC+8.8%
P/EMCD22.0xYUMC18.1x
PEGMCD2.53YUMC1.24
MCD
stronger →← stronger
YUMC
77
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
84
66
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
75
35
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
64
YUMC is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
MCD
YUMC
$7.8bB+
FCF
$940mC+
+6.3%C+
Rev
+8.8%B
D/E
0.38A-
22.0xB
P/E
18.1xB
2.53C
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.
MCD
YUMC
50% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
5% below
~16%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~8%/yr
-38%
1-yr DCF upside
-8%
-33%
5-yr DCF upside
+6%
-27%
10-yr DCF upside
+30%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
MCD
Why this score
  • Raising its dividend
YUMC
Why this score
  • Buying back stock
  • Raising its dividend
  • Durable high returns
MCDMcDonald's Corporation
Restaurants · $272.54 · beta 0.42
Why now
Restaurants · market cap $192.9b. Down 20% from 52-week high of $341.75 — deep drawdown territory. 31 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $316.06 (implying +16% upside).
Moat
Net margin 32% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. $192.9b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
ROE -859% 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 · $48.92 · beta 0.08
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.
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 MCD and YUMC diverge

On the headline score the gap is 17.7 points in favor of YUMC. The widest single difference is Value, where YUMC leads by 28.7 points.

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.