Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Restaurant Brands International Inc.
How Restaurant Brands International Inc. stacks up
QSR · against 1,585 other Consumer Cyclical companies
Growth
74/ 100
Above the middle of the pack.
Ranked #406 of 1,586 · scores higher than 74% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score159 peers with a growth score of 70–79, including QSR · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 74?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Mainly thanks to its 3-year revenue growth, earnings per share growth and revenue growth, which are stronger than most Consumer Cyclical peers.
- faster revenue growth over the last year: stronger than 63% of peers. Revenue growth: 6.5% vs peer median 3.7%
- faster growth in earnings per share: stronger than 76% of peers. Earnings per share growth: 32.8% vs peer median 4.2%
- faster revenue growth over three years: stronger than 78% of peers. 3-year revenue growth: 12.7% vs peer median 4.3%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = QSR, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | QSR | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 1,593 reported | 6.5% | 3.7% | 63% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 1,125 reported | 32.8% | 4.1% | 76% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 1,578 reported | 12.7% | 4.3% | 78% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around QSR| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 158.6B CNY (≈$22.2B) | 100 | 60 | |
| 1 | 1.3B MYR (≈$277M) | 100 | 60 | |
| 1 | 241M MYR (≈$53M) | 100 | 86 | |
| 1 | 184.4B HKD (≈$23.6B) | 100 | 91 | |
| 1 | 177.5B INR (≈$2.1B) | 100 | ||
| 406 | 93.7B INR (≈$1.1B) | 74 | 61 | |
| 406 |
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