EAT vs. WLFC
EAT (Brinker International, Inc.) and WLFC (Willis Lease Finance Corporation) are both stocks. EAT operates in Restaurants (Consumer Cyclical), while WLFC operates in Rental & Leasing Services (Industrials). Over the past 10 years, EAT returned 14.68%/yr vs 23.34%/yr for WLFC. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
EAT vs. WLFC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EAT achieves a 11.01% return, which is significantly lower than WLFC's 40.80% return. Over the past 10 years, EAT has underperformed WLFC with an annualized return of 14.68%, while WLFC has yielded a comparatively higher 23.34% annualized return.
EAT
- 1D
- 0.37%
- 1M
- 26.08%
- YTD
- 11.01%
- 6M
- 10.29%
- 1Y
- -9.63%
- 3Y*
- 62.12%
- 5Y*
- 21.19%
- 10Y*
- 14.68%
WLFC
- 1D
- -0.82%
- 1M
- -10.11%
- YTD
- 40.80%
- 6M
- 43.65%
- 1Y
- 31.69%
- 3Y*
- 66.56%
- 5Y*
- 33.79%
- 10Y*
- 23.34%
EAT vs. WLFC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EAT Brinker International, Inc. | 11.01% | 8.49% | 206.37% | 35.32% | -12.79% | -35.32% | 36.16% | -0.92% | 17.27% | -18.44% |
WLFC Willis Lease Finance Corporation | 40.80% | -34.14% | 332.92% | -17.17% | 56.73% | 23.60% | -48.29% | 70.26% | 38.57% | -2.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between EAT and WLFC is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 15, 1996 | 0.14 |
The correlation between EAT and WLFC shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (all time) to 0.26 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
EAT:
$7.09B
WLFC:
$1.38B
EAT:
$10.14
WLFC:
$17.02
EAT:
15.71
WLFC:
11.18
EAT:
0.36
WLFC:
0.00
EAT:
1.27
WLFC:
1.78
EAT:
17.46
WLFC:
1.99
EAT:
$5.73B
WLFC:
$757.62M
EAT:
$3.45B
WLFC:
$405.87M
EAT:
$807.20M
WLFC:
$416.98M
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
EAT vs. WLFC — Risk / Return Rank
EAT
WLFC
EAT vs. WLFC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brinker International, Inc. (EAT) and Willis Lease Finance Corporation (WLFC). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| EAT | WLFC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.88 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.15 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.22 | 1.00 | -1.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.44 | 2.00 | -2.45 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EAT vs. WLFC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EAT drawdown since its inception was -88.40%, roughly equal to the maximum WLFC drawdown of -88.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAT and WLFC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EAT | WLFC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -88.40% | -88.12% | -0.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -44.41% | -31.84% | -12.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -45.92% | -49.88% | +3.96% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -65.54% | -49.88% | -15.66% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -84.94% | -79.76% | -5.18% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.77% | -20.21% | +4.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.33% | -42.35% | +18.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 21.77% | 15.87% | +5.90% |
Volatility
EAT vs. WLFC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Brinker International, Inc. (EAT) is 15.23%, while Willis Lease Finance Corporation (WLFC) has a volatility of 16.30%. This indicates that EAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WLFC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EAT | WLFC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.23% | 16.30% | -1.07% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 36.27% | 36.76% | -0.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 46.95% | 46.92% | +0.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 49.04% | 42.82% | +6.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 55.13% | 50.96% | +4.17% |
Dividends
EAT vs. WLFC - Dividend Comparison
EAT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while WLFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EAT Brinker International, Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.67% | 3.62% | 3.46% | 3.71% | 2.67% | 2.50% |
WLFC Willis Lease Finance Corporation | 0.76% | 0.85% | 0.72% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Financials
EAT vs. WLFC - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Brinker International, Inc. and Willis Lease Finance Corporation. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
EAT vs. WLFC - Profitability Comparison
EAT - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Brinker International, Inc. reported a gross profit of 1.10B and revenue of 1.47B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 74.6%.
WLFC - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Willis Lease Finance Corporation reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 194.35M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.
EAT - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Brinker International, Inc. reported an operating income of 166.60M and revenue of 1.47B, resulting in an operating margin of 11.3%.
WLFC - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Willis Lease Finance Corporation reported an operating income of 33.79M and revenue of 194.35M, resulting in an operating margin of 17.4%.
EAT - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Brinker International, Inc. reported a net income of 127.90M and revenue of 1.47B, resulting in a net margin of 8.7%.
WLFC - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Willis Lease Finance Corporation reported a net income of 23.66M and revenue of 194.35M, resulting in a net margin of 12.2%.
Frequently Asked Questions
EAT and WLFC have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
WLFC has higher volatility (16.30%) compared to EAT (15.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EAT dropped -88.40% vs WLFC's -88.12%.
WLFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.68 vs -0.21), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for EAT and WLFC
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer