Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd

Price story Before the numbers, the tape. A stock price moves through four repeating seasons: a flat base (stage 1), an advance (2), a top (3), a decline (4). Where the price sits in that cycle frames everything below.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd trades at ₹66.5, in a confirmed uptrend and 3 weeks into that stage. That is −4.3% against its own 200-day average. It sits at 30% of a 52-week range of ₹58 to ₹86. On relative strength it is currently behind the NIFTY 500 on a trailing-13-week view (1 week and counting).

Today the stock is in a confirmed uptrend — week 3 of stage 2, confirmed. At ₹66.5 it trades −4.3% versus its 200-day average and sits at 30% of its 52-week range (₹58–₹86).

Against the market, two honest reads. Cumulative: over the last 5.6 years the stock moved −58% while the NIFTY 500 moved +108% — behind the index over the full window. Recent form: on a trailing-13-week view the stock is currently behind (1 week and counting; last ahead the week of 2026-07-10) — the ribbon below is that same metric, week by week.

What would end the trend, mechanically: two Friday closes in a row below the 200-day line. That is the exit rule — no debates.

→ The trend is one thing; the bill is another. Are you paying up for it? Next: how the P/E reads against its own history.

Valuation P/E is the price of ₹1 of annual profit: how many rupees the market pays for each rupee the company earns in a year.

P/E does not price Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd — earnings are negative, so there is no multiple to rank against its own history. The revenue and margin lines below are where a turn, when it comes, would show first. On sales the market values Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd at 1.6× its FY26 revenue of ₹2,823 Cr.

With earnings negative, P/E does not price — there is no multiple to rank against its own history. The revenue and margin lines below are where the turn, when it comes, will show first.

Put together: the multiple is unremarkable against its own past, so the story rests on the earnings line underneath it, not the multiple.

→ Cheap or dear rides on the earnings. Are they actually growing? Next: the fundamental stage — where the business sits in its arc, and how growth has compounded.

Stage: No read Every business sits somewhere on a fundamental arc, and this page names the spot before anything else. The last twelve quarters of revenue, profit and EPS growth — plus the return the business earns on its capital — are read as curves: Deteriorating (the curves are falling), Turning around (a trough has just formed and the last few quarters lift off it), Improving (the climb off the trough is sustained), Consistent (steadily positive with healthy returns), Topping out (still high but decelerating from the peak). When the curves genuinely disagree the read is Mixed; too little history is No read. CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is the smooth yearly pace that turns the starting value into the latest one — the fairest way to compare growth across different time spans. Read the columns together: if the 1-year number towers over the 10-year, recent growth is running hotter than the long-run trend. A dash means that window is not held, or the base year was a loss (where a growth rate is not meaningful).

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd reads as no read on its fundamental arc. Under eight usable quarters on the growth trio — not enough history for an honest trajectory read. The read is built from 10 quarters across 2 curves, on partial evidence.

Why it matters: with too little history, an honest page says so instead of guessing a trajectory.

Return readings here are annual, not quarterly — read as level and direction only; they can confirm the growth curves but never drive the stage on their own.

Fewer than eight usable quarters on the growth curves — this page will not guess a trajectory from a stub of history.

→ The stage names the trajectory. Next: the revenue line that produces it, quarter by quarter.

4-Factor Sector Score

48.7/100 — rank 3 of 8 in Quick Service Restaurant - QSR · 56% evidence confidence

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd scores 48.7 out of 100 against the 8 companies it is compared with in Quick Service Restaurant - QSR, ranking 3. Fill the missing evidence before acting; the ranking is deliberately pulled toward neutral.

The four contributions add to the total exactly: 21.1 + 4.1 + 10 + 13.5 = 48.7. This is the SAME number shown on the sector comparison — it is computed once, for the whole peer set, and read here.

What would change it: The read weakens if profit growth turns negative or margin improvement reverses while sector-relative strength deteriorates.

Revenue Revenue is the top line: everything the company billed its customers in the period.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd reported ₹707 Cr of revenue in the Mar 26 quarter, +11.7% year on year. That is the 10th straight quarter of year-on-year growth. Over 5 years it has compounded at 23.0% a year. The last full year, FY26, came in at ₹2,823 Cr. The last four reported quarters add to ₹2,823 Cr.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd reported ₹707 Cr of revenue in the Mar 26 quarter, +11.7% year on year. That is the 10th straight quarter of year-on-year growth. Over 5 years it has compounded at 23.0% a year. The last full year, FY26, came in at ₹2,823 Cr. The last four reported quarters add to ₹2,823 Cr.

FY26 revenue came in at ₹2,823 Cr (+10.7% on the year), capping 5 years at 23.0% compound. The latest quarter (Mar 26) printed ₹707 Cr, +11.7% year on year — the 10th consecutive quarter of year-over-year growth.

Pace check: the last four quarters averaged +10.7% growth against the decade's 23.0% — the current year is running slower than its own long-run rate.

Acceleration check: trailing-twelve-month revenue grew +10.7% over the last 4 quarters against +7.6%/yr over the last 8 — accelerating.

→ Revenue grew — did margins hold as it scaled? Next: 13.0% this quarter (+1.0 pp YoY).

Operating margin Operating margin is what is left of every ₹100 of sales after running the business, before interest and tax. It is the cleanest read on pricing power and cost control.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd's operating margin is 13.0% in the Mar 26 quarter, +1.0 percentage points against the same quarter a year ago. That is the widest this company has ever printed on a full-year basis. Across 6 fiscal years the operating margin has ranged 2.0% to 12.0%. The current quarter is running above every full year in that window.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd's operating margin is 13.0% in the Mar 26 quarter, +1.0 percentage points against the same quarter a year ago. That is the widest this company has ever printed on a full-year basis. Across 6 fiscal years the operating margin has ranged 2.0% to 12.0%. The current quarter is running above every full year in that window.

The latest quarter's operating margin is 13.0%, +1.0 pp against the same quarter a year ago. Across 6 fiscal years the operating margin has ranged 2.0%–12.0%, and FY26's 12.0% is the top of that band — a record year.

Why the margin moved: operating margin went +1.9 pp year on year while gross margin went +2.8 pp — the gain came mostly from the gross line: input costs and pricing.

Worth repeating from the valuation section: cheap against its own history on record margins is not the same thing as cheap — a record margin flatters every ratio built on top of it.

→ Margins held — did that reach the bottom line? Next: profit null in the latest quarter.

Net profit Net profit is what survives every cost, interest and tax — the number EPS, dividends and book value all grow from.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd posted a net loss of ₹47.0 Cr in the Mar 26 quarter. The full FY26 year was a loss of ₹204 Cr. That loss is 6.6% of the quarter's revenue. The same quarter a year earlier lost ₹60.0 Cr. 12 of the last 12 reported quarters were loss-making.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd posted a net loss of ₹47.0 Cr in the Mar 26 quarter. The full FY26 year was a loss of ₹204 Cr. That loss is 6.6% of the quarter's revenue. The same quarter a year earlier lost ₹60.0 Cr. 12 of the last 12 reported quarters were loss-making.

Mar 26 profit was ₹−47.0 Cr, null year on year. On the full year, FY26 printed ₹−204 Cr (null).

→ Profit rose — but did the cash follow?

Cash flow — the router The P&L says what was earned; the cash-flow statement says what actually arrived. Operating cash flow (CFO) against profit is the cleanest lie detector in the accounts.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd's cash-flow history is too thin to judge how much reported profit converts into cash. In FY26 that was ₹303 Cr of operating cash against ₹−204 Cr of profit. After ₹594 Cr of capital spending, ₹−291 Cr was left as free cash. Cash resolution here is annual, because quarterly cash statements are not published.

FY26: operating cash of ₹303 Cr against reported profit of ₹−204 Cr, leaving free cash of ₹−291 Cr after ₹594 Cr of capital spending.

Cash-flow readings here are annual — that is the resolution our series carries, so this section moves once a year.

Router verdict: the bigger cash user is investment — capital spending ran 1.8× depreciation over three years, so the next section's job is to check what that build-out is buying.

→ So follow the cash to where it goes. Next: ₹1,970 Cr of building over 3 years.

Where the cash goes Working capital is the cash tied up between paying suppliers and getting paid: debtor days (customers owe), inventory days (stock waits), and the cash conversion cycle (the whole loop, in days of sales).

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd's cash conversion cycle runs −111 days in FY26, up from −205 days in FY21. Capital spending ran ₹1,970 Cr over the last 3 years. At FY26 sales of ₹2,823 Cr each day of that cycle holds about ₹7.7 Cr, so roughly ₹−859 Cr sits inside the business at any moment.

FY26: debtors at 6 days, inventory at 15 days — roughly 0.5 months of stock waiting to sell; that is where the cash sits while it waits — for a full cycle of −111 days, looser than FY21's −205.

The full loop: cash goes out to suppliers and production on day 0; stock waits 15 days to sell; customers pay about 6 days after that; and suppliers themselves are paid at 132 days — netting out to the −111-day cycle.

In money terms: at FY26 sales of ₹2,823 Cr, each day of the cycle holds about ₹7.7 Cr — so the −111-day loop keeps roughly ₹−859 Cr sitting inside the business at any moment.

On the investment side: capital spending of ₹1,970 Cr over the last 3 fiscal years against ₹1,116 Cr of depreciation — the company is building well ahead of wear-and-tear. Capital work-in-progress stands at ₹41.0 Cr (FY26) — capacity paid for but not yet earning.

The synthesis: the cash is going into capacity, not disappearing into the cycle — the question becomes whether the new capacity earns.

→ Does all this activity actually earn its cost of capital? Next: ROCE is 0%.

Return on capital Return on capital employed (ROCE) is the profit the whole business earns on all the money in it — equity and debt together. It is the single best test of whether growth creates value or just size.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd earns a ROCE of 0% in FY26. That is up from a trough of −8% in FY22. A return-on-invested-capital spread against the cost of capital is not computable from what is held here. The wiring behind it is −7.2% net margin on 0.83× asset turns.

FY26 ROCE is 0%, recovered from a FY22 trough of −8% — the full ladder below shows the fall and the climb, undoctored.

Why the return is what it is — the wiring (FY26): −7.2% net margin × 0.83× asset turns × 4.69× balance-sheet leverage ≈ −28.0% on equity. Margin does its share; leverage is a meaningful part of the equation.

The quarterly return curves and the return-on-invested-capital overlay, which only the second data source carries, are not drawn on this page: its two data sources disagree by up to 9.1% on reported income across 14 comparable periods. A figure two sources cannot agree on is not drawn — the gap is a decision, not missing data.

→ Returns like these — is the balance sheet borrowing to make them? Next: debt-to-equity is 2.73.

Debt Debt-to-equity says how much of the business is funded by borrowings; interest cover says how many times operating profit pays the interest bill. Low and high, respectively, is the safe corner.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd carries ₹1,967 Cr of borrowings against ₹721 Cr of equity in FY26, a debt-to-equity of 2.73. Operating profit covers the interest bill 2×. Over 5 years borrowings went from ₹901 Cr to ₹1,967 Cr. Capital spending ran ₹1,970 Cr across the last 3 of those years.

FY26: borrowings of ₹1,967 Cr against equity of ₹721 Cr — a debt-to-equity of 2.73. Operating profit covers the interest bill 2×. Over 5 years borrowings went from ₹901 Cr to ₹1,967 Cr while capital spending ran ₹1,970 Cr in just the last 3 — part of the build-out is riding on borrowed money.

The total-debt and debt-to-equity series, which only the second data source carries, are not drawn on this page: its two data sources disagree by up to 9.1% on reported income across 14 comparable periods. A figure two sources cannot agree on is not drawn — the gap is a decision, not missing data.

→ Who owns this, and are they adding or leaving? Next: Domestic institutions added 11.2 points over 8 quarters.

Ownership Who owns the stock, quarter by quarter: promoters (the controlling owners), foreign and domestic institutions, and the public. Steady accumulation by people close to the numbers is a signal; a quiet register is also an answer.

Domestic institutions added 11.2 points of Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd over 8 quarters, the biggest move on the register. That takes domestic institutions to 39.6% of the company. Foreign institutions moved −9.5 points over the same window, to 9.3%. The register is read on the four disclosed classes only; nothing is inferred between filings.

The register over the last two years — Domestic institutions: +11.2 points over 8 quarters to 39.6%; Foreign institutions: −9.5 points over 8 quarters to 9.3%; Promoters: −6.1 points over 8 quarters to 9.2%. Note the structure: promoters hold under 20% — this is a widely-held company where institutions, not a family, set the direction.

Why the register moved: rotation — foreign institutions −9.5 points against domestic institutions +11.2 points over 8 quarters, with promoters −6.1 points — one class of institutions handing the register to the other, not a verdict change by the people closest to the numbers.

→ One last check: does the safety math agree? Next: the balance-sheet safety line.

Safety line The Z-score estimates how far a company sits from balance-sheet distress — above roughly 3 is safe, below roughly 1.8 is the danger zone. It was built for manufacturers, so it is not applied to banks and lenders.

Restaurant Brands Asia Ltd: the Z-score is not available for this stock, so we say so rather than invent one. It is a distance-to-distress estimate from the balance sheet, not a forecast of failure. The debt, cash-flow and return sections above carry the balance-sheet evidence this page does hold, and each of them states its own reporting date.

The safety line in one sentence: the Z-score is not available for this stock, so we say so rather than invent one.

Frequently asked questions