QSR.TO vs. L.TO
Compare and contrast key facts about Restaurant Brands International Inc. (QSR.TO) and Loblaw Companies Limited (L.TO).
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: QSR.TO or L.TO.
Key characteristics
| QSR.TO | L.TO | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | -7.64% | 47.41% |
| 1Y Return | 1.59% | 54.95% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 12.32% | 25.95% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 3.76% | 24.09% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.07 | 3.46 |
| Sortino Ratio | 0.25 | 4.46 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.03 | 1.61 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.08 | 6.74 |
| Martin Ratio | 0.14 | 29.98 |
| Ulcer Index | 9.95% | 1.88% |
| Daily Std Dev | 20.63% | 16.31% |
| Max Drawdown | -60.30% | -65.60% |
| Current Drawdown | -14.24% | 0.00% |
Fundamentals
| QSR.TO | L.TO | |
|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | CA$42.60B | CA$57.23B |
| EPS | CA$5.52 | CA$6.60 |
| PE Ratio | 17.02 | 28.39 |
| PEG Ratio | 1.44 | 3.15 |
| Total Revenue (TTM) | CA$7.93B | CA$42.06B |
| Gross Profit (TTM) | CA$2.95B | CA$13.75B |
| EBITDA (TTM) | CA$1.90B | CA$4.72B |
Correlation
The correlation between QSR.TO and L.TO is 0.30, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Performance
QSR.TO vs. L.TO - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, QSR.TO achieves a -7.64% return, which is significantly lower than L.TO's 47.41% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
QSR.TO vs. L.TO - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Restaurant Brands International Inc. (QSR.TO) and Loblaw Companies Limited (L.TO). 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.
Dividends
QSR.TO vs. L.TO - Dividend Comparison
QSR.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.44%, more than L.TO's 1.02% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QSR.TO Restaurant Brands International Inc. | 2.44% | 2.12% | 2.47% | 2.76% | 2.67% | 2.26% | 2.52% | 1.01% | 0.97% | 0.85% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
L.TO Loblaw Companies Limited | 1.02% | 1.37% | 1.34% | 1.37% | 2.07% | 1.86% | 0.48% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
QSR.TO vs. L.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QSR.TO drawdown since its inception was -60.30%, smaller than the maximum L.TO drawdown of -65.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QSR.TO and L.TO. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
QSR.TO vs. L.TO - Volatility Comparison
Restaurant Brands International Inc. (QSR.TO) has a higher volatility of 6.18% compared to Loblaw Companies Limited (L.TO) at 5.15%. This indicates that QSR.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than L.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Financials
QSR.TO vs. L.TO - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Restaurant Brands International Inc. and Loblaw Companies Limited. 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