PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HTHT vs. YUMC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

HTHT vs. YUMC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Huazhu Group Limited (HTHT) and Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HTHT achieves a -3.71% return, which is significantly higher than YUMC's -10.25% return.


HTHT

1D
-1.89%
1M
-6.22%
YTD
-3.71%
6M
-3.83%
1Y
31.87%
3Y*
5.24%
5Y*
-2.31%
10Y*
19.71%

YUMC

1D
-1.28%
1M
-9.15%
YTD
-10.25%
6M
-6.88%
1Y
0.49%
3Y*
-9.20%
5Y*
-7.86%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HTHT vs. YUMC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HTHT
Huazhu Group Limited
-3.71%50.26%0.96%-19.00%14.31%-17.08%13.28%39.96%-19.86%180.24%
YUMC
Yum China Holdings, Inc.
-10.25%1.18%15.41%-21.60%10.75%-11.99%19.48%44.85%-15.28%53.59%

Correlation

The correlation between HTHT and YUMC is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.38

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.49

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 18, 2016

0.46

The correlation between HTHT and YUMC shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (1 year) to 0.56 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

HTHT:

$14.44B

YUMC:

$14.94B

EPS

HTHT:

$15.32

YUMC:

$2.60

PE Ratio

HTHT:

2.88

YUMC:

16.25

PEG Ratio

HTHT:

0.04

YUMC:

1.08

PS Ratio

HTHT:

0.56

YUMC:

1.27

PB Ratio

HTHT:

1.32

YUMC:

2.75

Total Revenue (TTM)

HTHT:

$25.78B

YUMC:

$12.09B

Gross Profit (TTM)

HTHT:

$10.45B

YUMC:

$1.47B

EBITDA (TTM)

HTHT:

$8.78B

YUMC:

$1.71B

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

HTHT vs. YUMC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

HTHT
HTHT Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
HTHT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HTHT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
HTHT Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
HTHT Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
HTHT Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank

YUMC
YUMC Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
YUMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
YUMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
YUMC Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
YUMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
YUMC Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

HTHT vs. YUMC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Huazhu Group Limited (HTHT) and Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC). 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.


HTHTYUMCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.02

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.52

0.02

+1.50

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.54

0.05

+4.49

HTHT vs. YUMC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HTHT Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is higher than the YUMC Sharpe Ratio of 0.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HTHT and YUMC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


HTHTYUMCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.08

0.02

+1.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.05

-0.21

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.39

0.18

+0.21

Drawdowns

HTHT vs. YUMC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HTHT drawdown since its inception was -64.02%, which is greater than YUMC's maximum drawdown of -56.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HTHT and YUMC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HTHTYUMCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.02%

-56.49%

-7.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.05%

-26.06%

+5.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-41.05%

-51.42%

+10.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-60.87%

-56.45%

-4.42%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-64.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-19.18%

-34.37%

+15.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-25.80%

-19.36%

-6.44%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.04%

10.35%

-3.31%

Volatility

HTHT vs. YUMC - Volatility Comparison

Huazhu Group Limited (HTHT) has a higher volatility of 9.37% compared to Yum China Holdings, Inc. (YUMC) at 5.08%. This indicates that HTHT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than YUMC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HTHTYUMCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.37%

5.08%

+4.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.22%

18.77%

+3.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

29.80%

25.43%

+4.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

50.07%

37.20%

+12.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

48.97%

35.39%

+13.58%

Dividends

HTHT vs. YUMC - Dividend Comparison

HTHT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.78%, more than YUMC's 2.50% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HTHT
Huazhu Group Limited
4.78%3.78%1.91%2.78%0.50%0.00%0.71%0.00%1.12%0.43%0.00%2.18%
YUMC
Yum China Holdings, Inc.
2.50%2.01%1.33%1.23%0.88%0.96%0.42%1.00%1.25%0.25%0.00%0.00%

Financials

HTHT vs. YUMC - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Huazhu Group Limited and Yum China Holdings, Inc.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


2.00B3.00B4.00B5.00B6.00B7.00B20222023202420252026
5.96B
3.27B
(HTHT) Total Revenue
(YUMC) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

HTHT vs. YUMC - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Huazhu Group Limited and Yum China Holdings, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

-10.0%0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%20222023202420252026
38.8%
0
Portfolio components
HTHT - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Huazhu Group Limited reported a gross profit of 2.31B and revenue of 5.96B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 38.8%.

YUMC - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Yum China Holdings, Inc. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 3.27B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.

HTHT - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Huazhu Group Limited reported an operating income of 1.49B and revenue of 5.96B, resulting in an operating margin of 24.9%.

YUMC - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Yum China Holdings, Inc. reported an operating income of 447.00M and revenue of 3.27B, resulting in an operating margin of 13.7%.

HTHT - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Huazhu Group Limited reported a net income of 812.06M and revenue of 5.96B, resulting in a net margin of 13.6%.

YUMC - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Yum China Holdings, Inc. reported a net income of 309.00M and revenue of 3.27B, resulting in a net margin of 9.5%.


Frequently Asked Questions


HTHT and YUMC have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

HTHT has higher volatility (9.37%) compared to YUMC (5.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HTHT dropped -64.02% vs YUMC's -56.49%.

HTHT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.08 vs 0.02), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HTHT and YUMC

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