Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Jack in the Box Inc.
How Jack in the Box Inc. stacks up
JACK · against 1,552 other Consumer Cyclical companies
Valuation
47/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #816 of 1,553 · scores higher than 47% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score155 peers with a valuation score of 40–49, including JACK · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 47?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Its metrics sit close to the Consumer Cyclical norm.
- EBITDA yield is close to the peer norm. EBITDA yield: 0.8% vs peer median 8.8%
- Free cash flow yield is close to the peer norm. Free cash flow yield: 7.2% vs peer median 6.1%
- higher earnings for the price paid: stronger than 98% of peers. Earnings yield: 13.2% vs peer median 4.4%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = JACK, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | JACK | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,527 reported | 20.9% | 4.4% | 98% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,593 reported | 8.2% | 8.8% | 47% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 594 reported | Not reported | 6.1% | — | — | 20% |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,536 reported | -354.6% | 57.2% | 0% | Context only |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around JACK| 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 | |
| 816 | 4.0B USD | 47 | 62 | |
| 816 |
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