vs

Side-by-side financial comparison of BRINKER INTERNATIONAL, INC (EAT) and Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.

BRINKER INTERNATIONAL, INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.5B vs $1.2B, roughly 1.2× Zoom Communications, Inc.). Zoom Communications, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 49.8% vs 8.7%, a 41.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Zoom Communications, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (4.4% vs 3.2%). Over the past eight quarters, BRINKER INTERNATIONAL, INC's revenue compounded faster (10.3% CAGR vs 3.6%).

Brinker International, Inc. is an American multinational hospitality industry company that owns Chili's and Maggiano's Little Italy restaurant chains. Founded in 1975 and based in Dallas, Texas, Brinker currently owns, operates, or franchises 1,672 restaurants under the names Chili's Grill & Bar and Maggiano's Little Italy worldwide.

Zoom Communications, Inc. is an American communications technology company headquartered in San Jose, California, United States. It is primarily known for the videoconferencing application Zoom.

EAT vs ZM — Head-to-Head

Bigger by revenue
EAT
EAT
1.2× larger
EAT
$1.5B
$1.2B
ZM
Growing faster (revenue YoY)
ZM
ZM
+1.3% gap
ZM
4.4%
3.2%
EAT
Higher net margin
ZM
ZM
41.1% more per $
ZM
49.8%
8.7%
EAT
Faster 2-yr revenue CAGR
EAT
EAT
Annualised
EAT
10.3%
3.6%
ZM

Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2026

Metric
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Revenue
$1.5B
$1.2B
Net Profit
$127.9M
$612.9M
Gross Margin
77.9%
Operating Margin
11.3%
25.2%
Net Margin
8.7%
49.8%
Revenue YoY
3.2%
4.4%
Net Profit YoY
196.0%
EPS (diluted)
$2.87
$2.01

Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.

8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend

Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.

Revenue
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
$1.5B
Q4 25
$1.5B
$1.2B
Q3 25
$1.3B
$1.2B
Q2 25
$1.5B
$1.2B
Q1 25
$1.4B
$1.2B
Q4 24
$1.4B
$1.2B
Q3 24
$1.1B
$1.2B
Q2 24
$1.2B
$1.1B
Net Profit
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
$127.9M
Q4 25
$128.5M
$612.9M
Q3 25
$99.5M
$358.6M
Q2 25
$107.0M
$254.6M
Q1 25
$119.1M
$367.9M
Q4 24
$118.5M
$207.1M
Q3 24
$38.5M
$219.0M
Q2 24
$57.3M
$216.3M
Gross Margin
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
Q4 25
77.9%
Q3 25
77.6%
Q2 25
76.3%
Q1 25
75.7%
Q4 24
75.9%
Q3 24
75.5%
Q2 24
76.1%
Operating Margin
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
11.3%
Q4 25
11.6%
25.2%
Q3 25
8.7%
26.4%
Q2 25
9.8%
20.6%
Q1 25
11.0%
19.0%
Q4 24
11.5%
15.5%
Q3 24
5.0%
17.4%
Q2 24
6.1%
17.8%
Net Margin
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
8.7%
Q4 25
8.8%
49.8%
Q3 25
7.4%
29.5%
Q2 25
7.3%
21.7%
Q1 25
8.4%
31.1%
Q4 24
8.7%
17.6%
Q3 24
3.4%
18.8%
Q2 24
4.7%
19.0%
EPS (diluted)
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
$2.87
Q4 25
$2.86
$2.01
Q3 25
$2.17
$1.16
Q2 25
$2.31
$0.81
Q1 25
$2.56
$1.16
Q4 24
$2.61
$0.66
Q3 24
$0.84
$0.70
Q2 24
$1.22
$0.69

Balance Sheet & Financial Strength

Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.

Metric
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand
$1.2B
Total DebtLower is stronger
$424.4M
Stockholders' EquityBook value
$406.0M
$9.3B
Total Assets
$2.8B
$11.4B
Debt / EquityLower = less leverage
1.05×

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Cash + ST Investments
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
Q4 25
$15.0M
$1.2B
Q3 25
$33.6M
$1.2B
Q2 25
$18.9M
$1.2B
Q1 25
$17.5M
$1.3B
Q4 24
$14.8M
$1.3B
Q3 24
$16.2M
$1.5B
Q2 24
$64.6M
$1.9B
Total Debt
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
$424.4M
Q4 25
$451.3M
Q3 25
$525.8M
Q2 25
$426.0M
Q1 25
$518.3M
Q4 24
$652.0M
Q3 24
$806.9M
Q2 24
$786.3M
Stockholders' Equity
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
$406.0M
Q4 25
$379.3M
$9.3B
Q3 25
$343.9M
$9.0B
Q2 25
$370.9M
$8.9B
Q1 25
$259.0M
$8.9B
Q4 24
$131.5M
$8.7B
Q3 24
$12.7M
$8.5B
Q2 24
$39.4M
$8.3B
Total Assets
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
$2.8B
Q4 25
$2.7B
$11.4B
Q3 25
$2.7B
$11.0B
Q2 25
$2.7B
$11.0B
Q1 25
$2.6B
$11.0B
Q4 24
$2.6B
$10.7B
Q3 24
$2.5B
$10.5B
Q2 24
$2.6B
$10.3B
Debt / Equity
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
1.05×
Q4 25
1.19×
Q3 25
1.53×
Q2 25
1.15×
Q1 25
2.00×
Q4 24
4.96×
Q3 24
63.54×
Q2 24
19.96×

Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency

How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.

Metric
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Operating Cash FlowLast quarter
$571.8M
$629.3M
Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex
$614.3M
FCF MarginFCF / Revenue
50.0%
Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue
1.2%
Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit
4.47×
1.03×
TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters
$2.0B

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Operating Cash Flow
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
$571.8M
Q4 25
$218.9M
$629.3M
Q3 25
$120.8M
$515.9M
Q2 25
$186.0M
$489.3M
Q1 25
$212.0M
$424.6M
Q4 24
$218.2M
$483.2M
Q3 24
$62.8M
$449.3M
Q2 24
$141.5M
$588.2M
Free Cash Flow
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
Q4 25
$155.2M
$614.3M
Q3 25
$62.2M
$508.0M
Q2 25
$106.1M
$463.4M
Q1 25
$132.4M
$416.2M
Q4 24
$168.9M
$457.7M
Q3 24
$6.3M
$365.1M
Q2 24
$83.5M
$569.7M
FCF Margin
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
Q4 25
10.7%
50.0%
Q3 25
4.6%
41.7%
Q2 25
7.3%
39.4%
Q1 25
9.3%
35.2%
Q4 24
12.4%
38.9%
Q3 24
0.6%
31.4%
Q2 24
6.9%
49.9%
Capex Intensity
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
Q4 25
4.4%
1.2%
Q3 25
4.3%
0.7%
Q2 25
5.5%
2.2%
Q1 25
5.6%
0.7%
Q4 24
3.6%
2.2%
Q3 24
5.0%
7.2%
Q2 24
4.8%
1.6%
Cash Conversion
EAT
EAT
ZM
ZM
Q1 26
4.47×
Q4 25
1.70×
1.03×
Q3 25
1.21×
1.44×
Q2 25
1.74×
1.92×
Q1 25
1.78×
1.15×
Q4 24
1.84×
2.33×
Q3 24
1.63×
2.05×
Q2 24
2.47×
2.72×

Financial Flow Comparison

Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.

Revenue Breakdown by Segment

EAT
EAT

Company sales$1.5B99%
Franchise revenues$14.7M1%

ZM
ZM

Segment breakdown not available.

Related Comparisons