COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
PLNT vs YUMC
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. PLNT scored 63.1, YUMC scored 75.3 — YUMC leads.
Compare another set
PLNT
Planet Fitness, Inc.
63.1
$51.70 · $3.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
12.2
YUMC leads
YUMC
Yum China Holdings, Inc.
75.3
$44.71 · $15.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestYUMC16.4x
- Fastest growthPLNT+12.7%
- Highest qualityYUMC84 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valuePLNT-15%
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)
PLNT
stronger →← stronger
YUMC
66
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
84
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
76
76
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
67
YUMC is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
PLNT
YUMC
$262mC
FCF
$940mC+
+12.7%B+
Rev
+8.8%B
—
D/E
0.38A-
17.6xB
P/E
16.4xB+
0.92B+
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.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
PLNT
YUMC
15% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
14% below
~4%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~5%/yr
+5%
1-yr DCF upside
+0%
+18%
5-yr DCF upside
+16%
+40%
10-yr DCF upside
+42%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
PLNT
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
YUMC
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
The companies
PLNTPlanet Fitness, Inc.
Why now
Leisure · market cap $3.9b. Down 55% 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 $67.54 (implying +31% 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, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 55% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. ROE -39% 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.
Why now
Restaurants · market cap $15.3b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $58.39 — deep drawdown territory. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $62.05 (implying +39% 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.
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 PLNT and YUMC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 12.2 points in favor of YUMC. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- GrowthPLNT 50.0 · YUMC 75.7YUMC +25.7
- QualityPLNT 65.8 · YUMC 84.0YUMC +18.2
- ValuePLNT 76.4 · YUMC 67.3PLNT +9.1
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.