PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QSR vs. YUM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

QSR vs. YUM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Restaurant Brands International Inc. (QSR) and YUM! Brands, Inc. (YUM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QSR achieves a 8.59% return, which is significantly higher than YUM's 1.43% return. Over the past 10 years, QSR has underperformed YUM with an annualized return of 8.59%, while YUM has yielded a comparatively higher 11.70% annualized return.


QSR

1D
-0.98%
1M
-3.08%
YTD
8.59%
6M
6.92%
1Y
15.28%
3Y*
2.06%
5Y*
5.71%
10Y*
8.59%

YUM

1D
-1.35%
1M
0.36%
YTD
1.43%
6M
-0.82%
1Y
11.96%
3Y*
5.13%
5Y*
7.80%
10Y*
11.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QSR vs. YUM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QSR
Restaurant Brands International Inc.
8.59%8.64%-13.80%24.64%10.72%2.72%-0.34%25.61%-12.15%30.69%
YUM
YUM! Brands, Inc.
1.43%14.94%4.72%3.93%-5.99%30.05%9.85%11.41%14.61%31.09%

Correlation

The correlation between QSR and YUM is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.39

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

0.45

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

0.51

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2014

0.47

The correlation between QSR and YUM shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (1 year) to 0.51 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

QSR:

$33.71B

YUM:

$42.41B

EPS

QSR:

$2.09

YUM:

$6.21

PE Ratio

QSR:

35.18

YUM:

24.46

PS Ratio

QSR:

3.50

YUM:

5.01

Total Revenue (TTM)

QSR:

$9.59B

YUM:

$8.49B

Gross Profit (TTM)

QSR:

$3.17B

YUM:

$3.88B

EBITDA (TTM)

QSR:

$2.49B

YUM:

$2.83B

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

QSR vs. YUM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QSR
QSR Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
QSR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QSR Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
QSR Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
QSR Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
QSR Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

YUM
YUM Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
YUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
YUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
YUM Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
YUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
YUM Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
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.

QSR vs. YUM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Restaurant Brands International Inc. (QSR) and YUM! Brands, Inc. (YUM). 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.


QSRYUMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.11

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.15

0.97

+0.19

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.51

2.28

+0.23

QSR vs. YUM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QSR Sharpe Ratio is 0.66, which is comparable to the YUM Sharpe Ratio of 0.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QSR and YUM, 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...

Drawdowns

QSR vs. YUM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QSR drawdown since its inception was -63.03%, smaller than the maximum YUM drawdown of -67.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QSR and YUM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QSRYUMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-63.03%

-67.69%

+4.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.29%

-12.41%

-0.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.53%

-15.70%

-8.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.27%

-23.10%

-6.17%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.03%

-52.17%

-10.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.08%

-9.17%

-0.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.04%

-12.37%

+0.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.10%

5.26%

+0.84%

Volatility

QSR vs. YUM - Volatility Comparison

Restaurant Brands International Inc. (QSR) and YUM! Brands, Inc. (YUM) have volatilities of 6.28% and 6.42%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QSRYUMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.28%

6.42%

-0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.33%

14.91%

+2.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.19%

22.11%

+1.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.68%

20.49%

+2.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.53%

22.77%

+4.76%

Dividends

QSR vs. YUM - Dividend Comparison

QSR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.42%, more than YUM's 1.92% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QSR
Restaurant Brands International Inc.
3.42%3.63%3.56%2.82%3.34%3.49%3.40%3.14%3.44%1.27%1.30%1.18%
YUM
YUM! Brands, Inc.
1.92%1.88%2.00%1.85%1.78%1.44%1.73%1.67%1.57%1.47%41.26%2.31%

Financials

QSR vs. YUM - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Restaurant Brands International Inc. and YUM! Brands, 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


1.20B1.40B1.60B1.80B2.00B2.20B2.40B2.60B20222023202420252026
2.26B
2.06B
(QSR) Total Revenue
(YUM) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

QSR vs. YUM - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Restaurant Brands International Inc. and YUM! Brands, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%202220232024202520260
44.7%
Portfolio components
QSR - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Restaurant Brands International Inc. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 2.26B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.

YUM - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, YUM! Brands, Inc. reported a gross profit of 920.00M and revenue of 2.06B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 44.7%.

QSR - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Restaurant Brands International Inc. reported an operating income of 606.00M and revenue of 2.26B, resulting in an operating margin of 26.8%.

YUM - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, YUM! Brands, Inc. reported an operating income of 644.00M and revenue of 2.06B, resulting in an operating margin of 31.3%.

QSR - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Restaurant Brands International Inc. reported a net income of 338.00M and revenue of 2.26B, resulting in a net margin of 14.9%.

YUM - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, YUM! Brands, Inc. reported a net income of 432.00M and revenue of 2.06B, resulting in a net margin of 21.0%.


Frequently Asked Questions


QSR and YUM have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

YUM has higher volatility (6.42%) compared to QSR (6.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QSR dropped -63.03% vs YUM's -67.69%.

QSR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.66 vs 0.54), 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 QSR and YUM

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