Biglari Holdings Inc's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Biglari Holdings Inc (BHA) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Biglari Holdings Inc vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 410M vs 120,577M combined for tracked competitors (0.3% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+10.2% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+4.5%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Biglari Holdings Inc generated 12.2% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2026, vs 7.3% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 35.4% net margin compares with 19.4% for the peer group.
- Peer revenue share: Biglari Holdings Inc accounted for 0.4% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 0.3% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.17M compares with $0.09M for the peer group (2.0x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
BHA Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Biglari Holdings Inc reported revenue growth of 12.21 % year on year in Q2 2026, above its competitors' combined revenue growth of 7.33 %.
With a net margin of 35.36 %, Biglari Holdings Inc achieved higher profitability than its competitors (19.44 %).
Biglari Holdings Inc generated 0.36 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 0.34 % a year earlier.
Biglari Holdings Inc vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net income growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Biglari Holdings Inc and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Biglari Holdings Inc's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Restaurants industry grew revenue 8.1% year over year, combined, vs 12.2% for Biglari Holdings Inc. Biglari Holdings Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.15% to 0.16%, a gain of 0.01 percentage points.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | No | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (32) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (4) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
BHA Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
BHA Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Noodles and Company | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Bj s Restaurants Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | The Cheesecake Factory Incorporated | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Brinker International Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Flanigan s Enterprises Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Biglari Holdings Inc's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Publicly Traded Peers of Biglari Holdings Inc
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | - | 409.99 |
| Mcdonald s Corporation | 166,112.96 | 27,702.00 |
| Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc | 40,738.19 | 12,423.76 |
| Yum Brands Inc | 38,303.56 | 8,722.00 |
| Restaurant Brands International Inc | 32,857.80 | 9,699.00 |
| Darden Restaurants Inc | 22,913.43 | 13,210.90 |
| SUBTOTAL | 358,797.91 | 125,629.31 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Biglari Holdings Inc .
Sources: Biglari Holdings Inc's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Biglari Holdings Inc versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Abraxas Petroleum | Named by the company | 85% |
| Southern Oil | Named by the company | 85% |
| Biglari Holdings | Named by the company | 85% |
| Maxim | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Biglari Holdings Inc's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | Restaurant operations 66.18 % |
| Mcdonald s Corporation | International Operated Markets 50.75 % |
| Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc | U. S. 97.61 % |
| Restaurant Brands International Inc | Tim Hortons 44.04 % |
| Darden Restaurants Inc | Olive Garden 41.64 % |
| Yum China Holdings Inc | KFC 74.51 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Sign in to see all peers for Biglari Holdings Inc .
Biglari Holdings Inc's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | - | 173,800 | -12,611 |
| Mcdonald s Corporation | 166,113 | 184,680 | 58,580 |
| Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc | 40,738 | 95,347 | 10,893 |
| Yum Brands Inc | 38,304 | 178,000 | 90,102 |
| Restaurant Brands International Inc | 32,858 | 181,290 | 31,794 |
| Darden Restaurants Inc | 22,913 | 62,930 | 5,748 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 358,798 | 88,607 | 14,364 |
Sign in to see all peers for Biglari Holdings Inc .
Biglari Holdings Inc's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Yum Brands Inc | United States 54.40 % |
| Restaurant Brands International Inc | United States 48.54 % |
| Nathan s Famous Inc | US 97.75 % |
| One Group Hospitality Inc | US 99.64 % |
| Fat Brands Inc | United States 97.42 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Restaurants industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (81 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 60.46 % | 61.55 % (avg) | -1.1 pp |
| Operating Margin | - | industry median | - |
| EBITDA Margin | 3.49 % | 2.98 % (avg) | +0.5 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 8.29 % | 6.19 % (avg) | +2.1 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2019 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | - | -25.66 % | 0.58 % | -0.79 % | -0.88 % | 9.15 % |
| Operating Margin | -0.41 % | 18.88 % | 24.81 % | 26.46 % | 26.16 % | 22.75 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -0.17 % | 4.95 % | 7.31 % | 7.20 % | 7.14 % | 6.60 % |
| P/E | 4.4x | - | - | - | - | - |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Barriers to Entry | High (capital intensive) | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 8.29 % vs industry average 6.19 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Biglari Holdings Inc's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Biglari Holdings Inc's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Biglari Holdings Inc falls in the Low attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Harvest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Biglari Holdings Inc's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+10.2% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Return on equity 166.2 points below the industry aggregate.
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
- High capital intensity requires continuous reinvestment just to keep pace with the industry.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | 1.35 | 2.54 | 0.44 |
| Mcdonald s Corporation | 0.28 | 1.04 | - |
| Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc | 0.31 | 1.09 | - |
| Yum Brands Inc | 0.30 | 0.86 | - |
| Restaurant Brands International Inc | - | 1.01 | 2.55 |
| Darden Restaurants Inc | 0.09 | 0.37 | 1.04 |
Sign in to see all peers for Biglari Holdings Inc .
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | Q2 2026 | +12.2 % | -21.6 % |
| Mcdonald s Corporation | Q2 2026 | +3.7 % | +4.8 % |
| Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc | Q2 2026 | +9.3 % | -7.5 % |
| Yum Brands Inc | Q2 2026 | +12.2 % | +58.8 % |
| Restaurant Brands International Inc | Q2 2026 | +4.6 % | +152.9 % |
| Darden Restaurants Inc | Q2 2026 | +13.7 % | +33.2 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +7.3 % | +22.1 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Biglari Holdings Inc .
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Biglari Holdings Inc's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | Q2 2026 | +2.7 % | +146.5 % |
| Mcdonald s Corporation | Q2 2026 | +4.0 % | +13.5 % |
| Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc | Q2 2026 | - | +35.3 % |
| Yum Brands Inc | Q2 2026 | +25.0 % | +40.8 % |
| Restaurant Brands International Inc | Q2 2026 | - | +34.2 % |
| Darden Restaurants Inc | Q2 2026 | - | +10.8 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Biglari Holdings Inc .
Biglari Holdings Inc's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | - | - | - |
| Mcdonald s Corporation | 14.64% | 16.32% | - |
| Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc | 15.80% | 11.37% | 53.26% |
| Yum Brands Inc | 54.70% | 80.08% | - |
| Restaurant Brands International Inc | 6.72% | 6.42% | 32.38% |
| Darden Restaurants Inc | 9.45% | 11.44% | 54.55% |
Sign in to see all peers for Biglari Holdings Inc .
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Biglari Holdings Inc's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Biglari Holdings Inc | - | - |
| Mcdonald s Corporation | 18.99 | 6.00 |
| Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc | 29.18 | 3.28 |
| Yum Brands Inc | 17.42 | 4.39 |
| Restaurant Brands International Inc | 19.20 | 3.39 |
| Darden Restaurants Inc | 19.04 | 1.73 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 17.70 | 2.86 |
Sign in to see all peers for Biglari Holdings Inc .
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.