FATBP
Price
$2.84
Change
-$0.08 (-2.74%)
Updated
Jun 27 closing price
Capitalization
N/A
SG
Price
$13.59
Change
-$0.06 (-0.44%)
Updated
Jun 27 closing price
Capitalization
1.6B
38 days until earnings call
Interact to see
Advertisement

FATBP vs SG

Header iconFATBP vs SG Comparison
Open Charts FATBP vs SGBanner chart's image
FAT Brands
Price$2.84
Change-$0.08 (-2.74%)
Volume$5.54K
CapitalizationN/A
Sweetgreen
Price$13.59
Change-$0.06 (-0.44%)
Volume$4.15M
Capitalization1.6B
FATBP vs SG Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
FATBP
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SG
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
FATBP vs. SG commentary
Jun 29, 2025

To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is FATBP is a Hold and SG is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jun 29, 2025
Stock price -- (FATBP: $2.84 vs. SG: $13.59)
Brand notoriety: FATBP and SG are both not notable
Both companies represent the Restaurants industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: FATBP: 13% vs. SG: 80%
Market capitalization -- FATBP: $0 vs. SG: $1.6B
FATBP [@Restaurants] is valued at $0. SG’s [@Restaurants] market capitalization is $1.6B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Restaurants] industry ranges from $208.47B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Restaurants] industry is $8.13B.

Long-Term Analysis

It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).

FATBP’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSG’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • FATBP’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • SG’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, FATBP is a better buy in the long-term than SG.

Short-Term Analysis

It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.

If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.

FATBP’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SG’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • FATBP’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • SG’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 2 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, SG is a better buy in the short-term than FATBP.

Price Growth

FATBP (@Restaurants) experienced а +0.39% price change this week, while SG (@Restaurants) price change was +10.72% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Restaurants industry was -0.36%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.15%, and the average quarterly price growth was -3.08%.

Reported Earning Dates

SG is expected to report earnings on Aug 06, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Restaurants (-0.36% weekly)

The industry includes companies that operate full-service restaurants, fast food restaurants, cafeterias and snack bars. McDonald`s Corporation, Starbucks Corporation, YUM! Brands, Inc. and Restaurant Brands International Inc. are some of the largest U.S. restaurant-owning companies in terms of market capitalization. While restaurant spending could be viewed as discretionary for consumers, some companies in the business have been able to weather economic cycles by establishing strong loyalty among customers over the years. Many of them also have a strong global presence as well.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
SG YTD gains are higher at: -57.626 vs. FATBP (-68.712). FATBP (-20.55M) and SG (-21.47M) have comparable annual earnings (EBITDA) . SG has more cash in the bank: 184M vs. FATBP (12.2M). SG has less debt than FATBP: SG (329M) vs FATBP (1.48B). SG has higher revenues than FATBP: SG (685M) vs FATBP (583M).
FATBPSGFATBP / SG
CapitalizationN/A1.6B-
EBITDA-20.55M-21.47M96%
Gain YTD-68.712-57.626119%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue583M685M85%
Total Cash12.2M184M7%
Total Debt1.48B329M451%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
SG: Fundamental Ratings
SG
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
21
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
100
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
84
SMR RATING
1..100
94
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
65
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
75
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a

Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
FATBPSG
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
50%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
87%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
63%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
78%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
52%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
71%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
47%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
73%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
58%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
57%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
57%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
61%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 10 days ago
58%
Bearish Trend 19 days ago
80%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
62%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
70%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
81%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
FATBP
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SG
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
SNTCX25.020.15
+0.60%
Steward International Enhanced Index I
OGRIX34.350.13
+0.38%
Invesco Comstock Select R6
LEQCX11.450.04
+0.35%
LoCorr Dynamic Opportunity C
AVLIX8.000.02
+0.25%
American Century Value I
THISX77.14-0.29
-0.37%
T. Rowe Price Health Sciences I

FATBP and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that FATBP and CNNE have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FATBP and CNNE's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FATBP
1D Price
Change %
FATBP100%
-2.74%
CNNE - FATBP
26%
Poorly correlated
+0.05%
SG - FATBP
25%
Poorly correlated
-0.48%
TXRH - FATBP
25%
Poorly correlated
+1.46%
GTIM - FATBP
25%
Poorly correlated
-2.82%
FATBB - FATBP
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

SG and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, SG has been loosely correlated with CAVA. These tickers have moved in lockstep 56% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if SG jumps, then CAVA could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SG
1D Price
Change %
SG100%
-0.48%
CAVA - SG
56%
Loosely correlated
+0.28%
CMG - SG
44%
Loosely correlated
+1.44%
SHAK - SG
40%
Loosely correlated
+0.04%
RICK - SG
39%
Loosely correlated
+0.75%
PTLO - SG
39%
Loosely correlated
-0.09%
More