Stock Analysis on Net

YUM! Brands Inc. (NYSE:YUM)

$22.49

This company has been moved to the archive! The financial data has not been updated since October 11, 2016.

Analysis of Long-term (Investment) Activity Ratios

Microsoft Excel

Paying user area


We accept:

Visa Mastercard American Express Maestro Discover JCB PayPal Google Pay
Visa Secure Mastercard Identity Check American Express SafeKey

Long-term Activity Ratios (Summary)

YUM! Brands Inc., long-term (investment) activity ratios

Microsoft Excel
Dec 26, 2015 Dec 27, 2014 Dec 28, 2013 Dec 29, 2012 Dec 31, 2011
Net fixed asset turnover
Total asset turnover
Equity turnover

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-26), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31).


Net Fixed Asset Turnover
The net fixed asset turnover ratio exhibited minor fluctuations over the five-year period. It began at 3.12 in 2011, slightly increased to 3.21 in 2012, then declined to its lowest point of 2.93 in 2013. From 2014 onward, the ratio showed a gradual recovery, ending at 3.13 in 2015. Overall, the ratio remained relatively stable, indicating consistent efficiency in utilizing fixed assets to generate sales.
Total Asset Turnover
The total asset turnover ratio demonstrated a steady upward trend during the analyzed period. Starting from 1.43 in 2011, the ratio increased to 1.51 in 2012 and remained relatively stable at 1.50 in 2013. It then rose further to 1.59 in 2014 and reached 1.62 by 2015. This trend suggests improved overall asset efficiency, with assets generating progressively higher revenue year over year.
Equity Turnover
The equity turnover ratio showed significant variance and a marked upward trend over the period. It began at 6.93 in 2011 and decreased consistently to 6.33 in 2012 and 6.04 in 2013, indicating a decline in the rate at which equity generated revenue. However, a substantial increase occurred in 2014, with the ratio rising sharply to 8.58. This upward momentum continued dramatically in 2015, where the ratio more than doubled to 14.39. Such a pattern may reflect changes in equity structure or enhanced leveraging of equity to drive sales growth.

Net Fixed Asset Turnover

YUM! Brands Inc., net fixed asset turnover calculation, comparison to benchmarks

Microsoft Excel
Dec 26, 2015 Dec 27, 2014 Dec 28, 2013 Dec 29, 2012 Dec 31, 2011
Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions)
Revenues
Property, plant and equipment, net
Long-term Activity Ratio
Net fixed asset turnover1
Benchmarks
Net Fixed Asset Turnover, Competitors2
Airbnb Inc.
Booking Holdings Inc.
Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc.
McDonald’s Corp.
Starbucks Corp.

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-26), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31).

1 2015 Calculation
Net fixed asset turnover = Revenues ÷ Property, plant and equipment, net
= ÷ =

2 Click competitor name to see calculations.


Revenues
The annual revenues exhibit a fluctuating trend over the five-year period. After an increase from 12,626 million US dollars in 2011 to a peak of 13,633 million US dollars in 2012, revenues declined to 13,084 million in 2013. This was followed by a modest recovery to 13,279 million in 2014, and a slight decrease again to 13,105 million by the end of 2015. Overall, the revenue levels remained relatively stable around the 13,000 million mark with no clear upward or downward momentum.
Property, Plant, and Equipment, Net
The net value of property, plant, and equipment showed a general upward movement from 4,042 million US dollars in 2011 to a high of 4,498 million in 2014. However, this was followed by a decline to 4,189 million in 2015. This pattern suggests that capital investment increased initially but then was reduced or depreciated more rapidly towards the end of the period.
Net Fixed Asset Turnover
This ratio, which measures efficiency in using fixed assets to generate revenues, fluctuated across the years without a consistent trend. It increased slightly from 3.12 in 2011 to 3.21 in 2012, then decreased to 2.93 in 2013 and remained relatively stable at 2.95 in 2014 before rising again to 3.13 in 2015. These variations may reflect changes in operational efficiency or shifts in asset utilization rates, corresponding with the changes observed in both revenues and net fixed assets.

Total Asset Turnover

YUM! Brands Inc., total asset turnover calculation, comparison to benchmarks

Microsoft Excel
Dec 26, 2015 Dec 27, 2014 Dec 28, 2013 Dec 29, 2012 Dec 31, 2011
Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions)
Revenues
Total assets
Long-term Activity Ratio
Total asset turnover1
Benchmarks
Total Asset Turnover, Competitors2
Airbnb Inc.
Booking Holdings Inc.
Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc.
McDonald’s Corp.
Starbucks Corp.

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-26), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31).

1 2015 Calculation
Total asset turnover = Revenues ÷ Total assets
= ÷ =

2 Click competitor name to see calculations.


Revenues
Revenues showed an overall upward trend from 2011 to 2014, increasing from 12,626 million US dollars to a peak of 13,279 million US dollars. However, in 2015, revenues slightly declined to 13,105 million US dollars, indicating a minor contraction after several years of growth.
Total assets
Total assets steadily decreased each year, dropping from 8,834 million US dollars in 2011 to 8,075 million US dollars in 2015. This consistent reduction suggests a strategy of asset downsizing or increased efficiency in asset management over the period.
Total asset turnover
The total asset turnover ratio improved continuously from 1.43 times in 2011 to 1.62 times in 2015. This increase demonstrates an enhanced ability to generate revenue from assets, reflecting improved operational efficiency despite the reduction in asset base.

Equity Turnover

YUM! Brands Inc., equity turnover calculation, comparison to benchmarks

Microsoft Excel
Dec 26, 2015 Dec 27, 2014 Dec 28, 2013 Dec 29, 2012 Dec 31, 2011
Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions)
Revenues
Shareholders’ equity, YUM! Brands, Inc.
Long-term Activity Ratio
Equity turnover1
Benchmarks
Equity Turnover, Competitors2
Airbnb Inc.
Booking Holdings Inc.
Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc.
McDonald’s Corp.
Starbucks Corp.

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-26), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31).

1 2015 Calculation
Equity turnover = Revenues ÷ Shareholders’ equity, YUM! Brands, Inc.
= ÷ =

2 Click competitor name to see calculations.


Revenues
The revenues exhibit a fluctuating trend over the five-year period. After increasing from 12,626 million US dollars in 2011 to a peak of 13,633 million in 2012, revenues declined slightly in the following years, with figures of 13,084 million in 2013, 13,279 million in 2014, and then a minor dip to 13,105 million in 2015. Overall, revenues show relative stability with minor variations, lacking a clear upward or downward trend.
Shareholders' Equity
Shareholders' equity demonstrates a downward trajectory during the analyzed period. Starting at 1,823 million US dollars in 2011, it increased to 2,154 million in 2012 and slightly to 2,166 million in 2013. However, it then experienced a significant decline to 1,547 million in 2014, followed by a further reduction to 911 million in 2015. This marked decrease in equity suggests substantial changes in the company’s financial structure or distribution to shareholders during the latter years.
Equity Turnover Ratio
The equity turnover ratio, defined as revenues divided by shareholders' equity, varied significantly throughout the period. It started at 6.93 in 2011, decreased gradually to 6.33 in 2012 and 6.04 in 2013, then sharply increased to 8.58 in 2014 and surged to 14.39 in 2015. This pattern indicates an increasing efficiency in generating revenues from shareholders’ equity, largely driven by the contraction in equity rather than substantial growth in revenues.