MCD vs SBUX Stock Comparison
Compare MCD and SBUX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between MCD and SBUX?
MCD leads the current stock comparison as McDonald's Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
McDonald's Corporation vs Starbucks Corporation
MCD leads
MCD leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support MCD, and its current signal state is conflicted.
McDonald's Corporation
Starbucks Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MCD over SBUX, 39 versus 37 as of Sep 11, 2026. MCD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while SBUX holds the stronger momentum profile. MCD also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MCD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. MCD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare McDonald's Corporation and Starbucks Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare MCD and SBUX against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Momentum21 vs 35SBUX +14
- Quality56 vs 44MCD +12
- Value35 vs 24MCD +11
- Risk Resilience45 vs 51SBUX +6
3 of 6 evidence groups favor MCD. MCD’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; SBUX keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1
No new signals fired.
MCD's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MCD and SBUX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MCD (McDonald's Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
SBUX (Starbucks Corporation): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, technicals.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
MCDMCD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SBUXSBUX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MCDMCD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
SBUXSBUX on the Momentum factor, by 14 points.
Lower downside
SBUXSBUX on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
MCDMCD on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | MCD | SBUX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +25.7% | +15.8% | MCD has more room |
| Target dispersion | +20.5% | +28.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 13 | 14 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MCD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 39 vs 37 |
| Fundamentals | MCDon balance | revenue growth 8.9% vs -2.2%; EPS growth 19% vs 102.2%; TTM ROE -5.6% vs -24.3%; gross margin 57.4% vs 31.7%; operating margin 45.8% vs 9.4% — MCD takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | MCD | Value 35 vs 24 |
| Technicals | SBUX | Price vs 50-day -6% vs -6.2%; vs 200-day -14.2% vs 2.3% |
| Risk Resilience | SBUX | Risk Resilience 45 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | MCD | Target upside 25.7% vs 15.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MCD and SBUX and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on MCD.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10MCD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MCD +2
- 39 vs 37
- 7 sessions ago
- MCD +2
- 40 vs 38
- 30 sessions ago
- MCD +1
- 44 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- MCD +3
- 47 vs 44
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Sep 4 when MCD moved ahead of SBUX.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
1 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (9.91%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.51%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
MCD leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.21%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.48%, AIQ 0 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1SBUX closes the Quality gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to MCD's edge.
- 2SBUX's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3MCD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
MCD leads on balance| Metric | MCD | SBUX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.9% | -2.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 19% | 102.2% |
| Gross margin | 57.4% | 31.7% |
| Operating margin | 45.8% | 9.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -5.6% | -24.3% |
| Debt to equity | -53.36 | -2.92 |
Performance
SBUX leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | MCD | SBUX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3% | -7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.2% | -8.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -10.4% | 0.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -22.2% | -2.2% |
| Year to date | -16.2% | 17.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -19.1% | 17.9% |
Technicals
SBUX has the stronger structure| Metric | MCD | SBUX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 25.7 | 37.8 |
| ADX (14) | 25.1 | 14.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6% | -6.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -14.2% | 2.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18% | 22% |
Risk
SBUX is the more resilient| Metric | MCD | SBUX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.02 | 0.57 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.26 | 0.61 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.94 | 1.1 |
| Max drawdown | -25.8% | -14.5% |
| Current drawdown | -25.8% | -8.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 18.5% | 27.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MCD or SBUX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MCD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 39 against SBUX's 37. The edge comes from quality and value. SBUX is not without a case — it holds the better momentum profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is MCD or SBUX the better buy right now?
MCD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MCD over SBUX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SBUX leads Momentum by 14 points; MCD leads Quality by 12 points; MCD leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MCD or SBUX?
Analyst price targets imply +25.7% upside for MCD and +15.8% for SBUX, so the Street currently favors MCD. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, MCD or SBUX?
MCD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MCD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, MCD or SBUX?
SBUX on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, MCD or SBUX?
SBUX on the Momentum factor, by 14 points. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, MCD or SBUX?
SBUX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SBUX on Risk Resilience, by 6 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is MCD more profitable than SBUX?
MCD leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 57.4% vs 31.7%; operating margin 45.8% vs 9.4%; ttm roe -5.6% vs -24.3%.
Is MCD's lead over SBUX getting stronger or weaker?
MCD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-04, when MCD moved ahead of SBUX.
What would change the MCD vs SBUX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SBUX closes the Quality gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to MCD's edge; SBUX's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; MCD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about MCD and SBUX?
MCD: 1 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted. SBUX: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on MCD is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On SBUX it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MCD and SBUX with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.