Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to CAVA Group, Inc.
How CAVA Group, Inc. stacks up
CAVA · against 1,552 other Consumer Cyclical companies
Valuation
16/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #1,297 of 1,553 · scores higher than 16% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score155 peers with a valuation score of 10–19, including CAVA · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 16?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Mainly because of its EBITDA yield, free cash flow yield and earnings yield, which are weaker than most Consumer Cyclical peers.
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 84% of peers. EBITDA yield: 2.3% vs peer median 8.8%
- less free cash flow for the price paid: weaker than 77% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 0.7% vs peer median 6.1%
- lower earnings for the price paid: weaker than 75% of peers. Earnings yield: 0.9% vs peer median 4.4%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = CAVA, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | CAVA | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,527 reported | 0.9% | 4.4% | 25% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,593 reported | 2.3% | 8.8% | 16% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 594 reported | 0.7% | 6.1% | 23% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,536 reported | 11.9% | 57.2% | 10% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around CAVA| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 198.5B KRW (≈$143M) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1 | 623.0B KRW (≈$449M) | 100 | 65 | |
| 1 | 382.5B KRW (≈$275M) | 100 | 57 | |
| 1 | 412.0B KRW (≈$297M) | 100 | 56 | |
| 1 | 1.49T KRW (≈$1.1B) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1,297 | 9.8B CNY (≈$1.4B) | 16 | 65 | |
| 1,297 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score