vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CRACKER BARREL OLD COUNTRY STORE, INC (CBRL) and Texas Roadhouse, Inc. (TXRH), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Texas Roadhouse, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.5B vs $797.2M, roughly 1.9× CRACKER BARREL OLD COUNTRY STORE, INC). Texas Roadhouse, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -3.1% vs 5.8%, a 8.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Texas Roadhouse, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (3.1% vs -10.9%). Over the past eight quarters, Texas Roadhouse, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (12.8% CAGR vs -2.4%).
Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., doing business as Cracker Barrel, is an American chain of restaurant and gift stores with a Southern country theme. The company's headquarters are in Lebanon, Tennessee, where Cracker Barrel was founded by Dan Evins and Tommy Lowe in 1969. The chain's early locations were positioned near Interstate Highway exits in the Southeastern and Midwestern United States, but expanded across the country during the 1990s and 2000s. As of August 10, 2023, the compan...
Texas Roadhouse is an American steakhouse chain that specializes in steaks in a Texan and Southwestern cuisine style. It is a subsidiary of Texas Roadhouse Inc, which has two other concepts and is headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky. As of August 2025, the chain operates about 800 locations in 49 U.S. states and 70 international locations in 11 countries.
CBRL vs TXRH — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 2026 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $797.2M | $1.5B |
| Net Profit | $-24.6M | $86.7M |
| Gross Margin | 68.8% | — |
| Operating Margin | -4.1% | 6.5% |
| Net Margin | -3.1% | 5.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -10.9% | 3.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -235.7% | -26.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-1.10 | $1.29 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $797.2M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $821.1M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $949.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $894.4M | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $817.1M | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $935.4M | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | $-24.6M | $86.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $84.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.6M | $116.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $22.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $118.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $18.1M | $86.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-9.2M | $123.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $26.5M | $116.0M |
| Q4 25 | 68.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 69.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 67.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 69.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 70.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 66.3% | — |
| Q4 25 | -4.1% | 6.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 6.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.8% | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 9.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.5% | 8.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.4% | 10.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.3% | 10.1% |
| Q4 25 | -3.1% | 5.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 5.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.5% | 8.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | 6.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.1% | 9.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.8% | 8.8% |
| Q4 25 | $-1.10 | $1.29 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.25 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.56 | $1.70 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.99 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.73 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.80 | $1.26 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.41 | $1.79 | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.19 | $1.69 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $8.9M | $134.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $428.8M | $1.5B |
| Total Assets | $2.2B | $3.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $8.9M | $134.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $108.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.8M | $221.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $245.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.0M | $189.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.9M | $197.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $12.6M | $213.4M |
| Q4 25 | $428.8M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $469.3M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $460.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $440.1M | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $426.6M | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $462.0M | $1.2B |
| Q4 25 | $2.2B | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1B | $3.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.1B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.2B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2B | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.2B | $2.8B |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $-53.4M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-88.9M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -11.2% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 4.5% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $-53.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $143.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.0M | $237.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $237.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $69.5M | $138.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $37.6M | $133.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $77.7M | $243.4M |
| Q4 25 | $-88.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $14.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-13.6M | $160.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $129.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $22.1M | $47.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $8.2M | $56.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $50.9M | $165.8M |
| Q4 25 | -11.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -1.7% | 11.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 9.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.5% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.0% | 4.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.4% | 12.5% |
| Q4 25 | 4.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 9.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.5% | 5.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.3% | 7.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.6% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.9% | 5.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.69× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.83× | 2.05× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.00× | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.83× | 1.60× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.09× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.93× | 2.10× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CBRL
| Restaurant | $650.6M | 82% |
| Retail | $146.6M | 18% |
TXRH
| Food And Beverage | $1.5B | 99% |
| Texas Roadhouse Segment | $21.2M | 1% |
| Franchise | $8.2M | 1% |
| Franchise Royalty | $7.4M | 0% |
| Bubba S33Segment | $2.3M | 0% |
