CART Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Cava Group has a net margin of 13.85% compared to Maplebear's net margin of 7.37%. Maplebear's return on equity of 13.63% beat Cava Group's return on equity of 9.18%.

Maplebear has a consensus price target of $51.05, signalling upside risk potential of 9.59%. On the other hand Cava Group has an analysts' consensus of $149.69 which suggests that it could grow by 27.39%. Given that Cava Group has higher upside potential than Maplebear, analysts believe Cava Group is more attractive than Maplebear.

Maplebear has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Cava Group has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Maplebear has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Cava Group offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Maplebear pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Cava Group pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Maplebear quarterly revenues are $852M, which are larger than Cava Group quarterly revenues of $243.8M. Maplebear's net income of $118M is higher than Cava Group's net income of $18M. Notably, Maplebear's price-to-earnings ratio is 30.51x while Cava Group's PE ratio is 255.46x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Maplebear is 4.06x versus 15.06x for Cava Group. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Brinker International has a net margin of 13.85% compared to Maplebear's net margin of 3.38%. Maplebear's return on equity of 13.63% beat Brinker International's return on equity of --.

Maplebear has a consensus price target of $51.05, signalling upside risk potential of 9.59%. On the other hand Brinker International has an analysts' consensus of $128.38 which suggests that it could fall by -10.57%. Given that Maplebear has higher upside potential than Brinker International, analysts believe Maplebear is more attractive than Brinker International.

Maplebear has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Brinker International has a beta of 2.523, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 152.255%.

Maplebear has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Brinker International offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Maplebear pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Brinker International pays out 0.13% of its earnings as a dividend. Brinker International's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Maplebear quarterly revenues are $852M, which are smaller than Brinker International quarterly revenues of $1.1B. Maplebear's net income of $118M is higher than Brinker International's net income of $38.5M. Notably, Maplebear's price-to-earnings ratio is 30.51x while Brinker International's PE ratio is 35.01x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Maplebear is 4.06x versus 1.45x for Brinker International. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Expedia Group has a net margin of 13.85% compared to Maplebear's net margin of 16.85%. Maplebear's return on equity of 13.63% beat Expedia Group's return on equity of 42.54%.

Maplebear has a consensus price target of $51.05, signalling upside risk potential of 9.59%. On the other hand Expedia Group has an analysts' consensus of $192.36 which suggests that it could grow by 1.95%. Given that Maplebear has higher upside potential than Expedia Group, analysts believe Maplebear is more attractive than Expedia Group.

Maplebear has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Expedia Group has a beta of 1.831, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 83.12%.

Maplebear has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Expedia Group offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Maplebear pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Expedia Group pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Maplebear quarterly revenues are $852M, which are smaller than Expedia Group quarterly revenues of $4.1B. Maplebear's net income of $118M is lower than Expedia Group's net income of $684M. Notably, Maplebear's price-to-earnings ratio is 30.51x while Expedia Group's PE ratio is 24.28x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Maplebear is 4.06x versus 1.95x for Expedia Group. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Ulta Beauty has a net margin of 13.85% compared to Maplebear's net margin of 9.57%. Maplebear's return on equity of 13.63% beat Ulta Beauty's return on equity of 53.26%.

Maplebear has a consensus price target of $51.05, signalling upside risk potential of 9.59%. On the other hand Ulta Beauty has an analysts' consensus of $454.16 which suggests that it could grow by 9.88%. Given that Ulta Beauty has higher upside potential than Maplebear, analysts believe Ulta Beauty is more attractive than Maplebear.

Maplebear has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Ulta Beauty has a beta of 1.284, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 28.415%.

Maplebear has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Ulta Beauty offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Maplebear pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Ulta Beauty pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Maplebear quarterly revenues are $852M, which are smaller than Ulta Beauty quarterly revenues of $2.5B. Maplebear's net income of $118M is lower than Ulta Beauty's net income of $242.2M. Notably, Maplebear's price-to-earnings ratio is 30.51x while Ulta Beauty's PE ratio is 16.54x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Maplebear is 4.06x versus 1.75x for Ulta Beauty. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.