Texas Roadhouse holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across profitability and growth. DICK'S Sporting Goods still leads on growth and valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. Both sides have seen trend damage — neither carries a clear market edge right now. With both trends damaged, the structural comparison carries most of the weight here.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
This is not just a one-metric split: both profitability and stability materially support the lead. The overall score gap is 13 points in favour of Texas Roadhouse, Inc..
This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
This level of similarity signals a strong structural match, even though some dimensions still separate the two companies.
The clearest structural overlap shows up in operating margin level and capital structure.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Texas Roadhouse, Inc. is cheaper, but DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc. is still stronger.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Capital efficiency adds support, with a 6.3-point ROIC advantage.
DICK'S Sporting Goods still pushes back on growth, with a 57-point revenue-growth advantage that keeps the read from becoming one-way.
The profitability edge is decisive, even though current pricing and growth still lean somewhat toward DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc..
Break down the DKS vs TXRH comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how DKS and TXRH each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.