Aramark (ARMK) Competitors

15.1% of Intercontinental Hotels Group shares are owned by institutional investors. 2.8% of Aramark shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Aramark has a consensus price target of $48.67, indicating a potential upside of 7.54%. Given Aramark's higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Aramark is more favorable than Intercontinental Hotels Group.

Aramark has a net margin of 1.69% compared to Intercontinental Hotels Group's net margin of 0.00%. Aramark's return on equity of 16.15% beat Intercontinental Hotels Group's return on equity.

In the previous week, Aramark had 5 more articles in the media than Intercontinental Hotels Group. MarketBeat recorded 7 mentions for Aramark and 2 mentions for Intercontinental Hotels Group. Aramark's average media sentiment score of 1.26 beat Intercontinental Hotels Group's score of 0.20 indicating that Aramark is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Intercontinental Hotels Group has higher earnings, but lower revenue than Aramark.

Intercontinental Hotels Group pays an annual dividend of $2.43 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.7%. Aramark pays an annual dividend of $0.48 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.1%. Aramark pays out 40.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Aramark has increased its dividend for 1 consecutive years.

Intercontinental Hotels Group has a beta of 1.13, suggesting that its stock price is 13% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Aramark has a beta of 1.08, suggesting that its stock price is 8% more volatile than the S&P 500.

85.6% of Yum China shares are held by institutional investors. 2.8% of Aramark shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 0.4% of Yum China shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, large money managers and endowments believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Aramark currently has a consensus price target of $48.67, indicating a potential upside of 7.54%. Yum China has a consensus price target of $59.05, indicating a potential upside of 22.00%. Given Yum China's higher possible upside, analysts plainly believe Yum China is more favorable than Aramark.

Yum China has a net margin of 7.83% compared to Aramark's net margin of 1.69%. Aramark's return on equity of 16.15% beat Yum China's return on equity.

In the previous week, Yum China had 20 more articles in the media than Aramark. MarketBeat recorded 27 mentions for Yum China and 7 mentions for Aramark. Aramark's average media sentiment score of 1.26 beat Yum China's score of 0.64 indicating that Aramark is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Yum China has lower revenue, but higher earnings than Aramark. Yum China is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Aramark, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Aramark pays an annual dividend of $0.48 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.1%. Yum China pays an annual dividend of $1.16 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.4%. Aramark pays out 40.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Yum China pays out 44.4% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. Aramark has increased its dividend for 1 consecutive years and Yum China has increased its dividend for 5 consecutive years. Yum China is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Aramark has a beta of 1.08, meaning that its share price is 8% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Yum China has a beta of 0.13, meaning that its share price is 87% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Aramark pays an annual dividend of $0.48 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.1%. H World Group pays an annual dividend of $2.56 per share and has a dividend yield of 5.2%. Aramark pays out 40.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. H World Group pays out 113.8% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Aramark has increased its dividend for 1 consecutive years.

In the previous week, Aramark had 3 more articles in the media than H World Group. MarketBeat recorded 7 mentions for Aramark and 4 mentions for H World Group. Aramark's average media sentiment score of 1.26 beat H World Group's score of 1.00 indicating that Aramark is being referred to more favorably in the media.

46.4% of H World Group shares are held by institutional investors. 2.8% of Aramark shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 49.4% of H World Group shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, large money managers and endowments believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

H World Group has a net margin of 20.05% compared to Aramark's net margin of 1.69%. H World Group's return on equity of 37.79% beat Aramark's return on equity.

H World Group has higher revenue and earnings than Aramark. H World Group is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Aramark, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Aramark currently has a consensus price target of $48.67, indicating a potential upside of 7.54%. H World Group has a consensus price target of $54.80, indicating a potential upside of 12.13%. Given H World Group's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts plainly believe H World Group is more favorable than Aramark.

Aramark has a beta of 1.08, meaning that its share price is 8% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, H World Group has a beta of 0.15, meaning that its share price is 85% less volatile than the S&P 500.

In the previous week, CAVA Group had 4 more articles in the media than Aramark. MarketBeat recorded 11 mentions for CAVA Group and 7 mentions for Aramark. Aramark's average media sentiment score of 1.26 beat CAVA Group's score of 0.53 indicating that Aramark is being referred to more favorably in the media.

73.2% of CAVA Group shares are owned by institutional investors. 2.8% of Aramark shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 6.7% of CAVA Group shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, hedge funds and large money managers believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

CAVA Group has a net margin of 5.40% compared to Aramark's net margin of 1.69%. Aramark's return on equity of 16.15% beat CAVA Group's return on equity.

Aramark has higher revenue and earnings than CAVA Group. Aramark is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than CAVA Group, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Aramark currently has a consensus target price of $48.67, indicating a potential upside of 7.54%. CAVA Group has a consensus target price of $89.70, indicating a potential downside of 0.69%. Given Aramark's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, research analysts clearly believe Aramark is more favorable than CAVA Group.

Aramark has a beta of 1.08, meaning that its stock price is 8% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, CAVA Group has a beta of 1.9, meaning that its stock price is 90% more volatile than the S&P 500.