Starbucks
Through the investors’ lenses
Each of these investors has said in public what they look at before buying. Click a name to see how this company measures up — a tick where it passes one of their tests, a cross where it does not.
Warren Buffett 1/2
| Measure | SBUX | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Owner earnings | $1.32bn | positive | ✓ |
| Return on equity | — | median 11.7% | — |
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
| Operating margin | 7.9% | median 15.0% | ✗ |
Passes 1 of 2. To be clear: Warren Buffett has never said anything about Starbucks. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Terry Smith 2/3
| Measure | SBUX | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Return on capital employed | 36.8% | median 10.1% | ✓ |
| Cash conversion | 2.56x | median 1.78x | ✓ |
| Operating margin | 7.9% | median 15.0% | ✗ |
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
Passes 2 of 3. To be clear: Terry Smith has never said anything about Starbucks. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Charlie Munger 1/2
| Measure | SBUX | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Return on capital employed | 36.8% | median 10.1% | ✓ |
| Return on equity | — | median 11.7% | — |
| Operating margin | 7.9% | median 15.0% | ✗ |
Passes 1 of 2. To be clear: Charlie Munger has never said anything about Starbucks. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Chuck Akre 1/1
| Measure | SBUX | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Return on equity | — | median 11.7% | — |
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
| Cash conversion | 2.56x | median 1.78x | ✓ |
Passes 1 of 1. To be clear: Chuck Akre has never said anything about Starbucks. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Philip Fisher 1/4
| Measure | SBUX | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operating margin | 7.9% | median 15.0% | ✗ |
| Net margin | 5.0% | median 10.2% | ✗ |
| Return on capital employed | 36.8% | median 10.1% | ✓ |
| Operating margin, held or improving | 7.9% | 10-yr median 15.4% | ✗ |
Passes 1 of 4. To be clear: Philip Fisher has never said anything about Starbucks. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Walter Schloss 0/1
| Measure | SBUX | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Current ratio | 0.72x | median 1.25x | ✗ |
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
Passes 0 of 1. To be clear: Walter Schloss has never said anything about Starbucks. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Benjamin Graham 1/2
| Measure | SBUX | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Current ratio | 0.72x | 2.00x published | ✗ |
| Long-term debt to working capital | — | 1.00x published | — |
| Positive earnings, ten years running | 10 yrs | 10 published | ✓ |
Passes 1 of 2. To be clear: Benjamin Graham has never said anything about Starbucks. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Joel Greenblatt 1/1
| Measure | SBUX | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Return on capital employed | 36.8% | median 10.1% | ✓ |
Passes 1 of 1. To be clear: Joel Greenblatt has never said anything about Starbucks. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Peter Lynch 0/1
| Measure | SBUX | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
| Net margin | 5.0% | median 10.2% | ✗ |
Passes 0 of 1. To be clear: Peter Lynch has never said anything about Starbucks. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
| Basis | Payout | Why |
|---|---|---|
| GAAP earnings | 150.3% | whyThe figure most screeners publish. |
| Operating cash flow | 58.4% | whyBefore capital spending. |
| Free cash flow | 113.5% | whyAfter maintaining the business. |
Spread between highest and lowest: 91.9 percentage points. Same filings, different denominators.
Coverage rating 11 / 100 — Not covered. ? Peer standing 1/50Direction 0/30Stability 10/20
Against its own history: 113.5% this year vs 66.2% median over the prior 5. A gap this size is usually a one-off — acquisition, settlement, cyclical trough — not a dividend that stopped being funded. The rating reads the latest year; the table shows the trend.
Free cash flow payout, last 6 years
| Fiscal year | Payout |
|---|---|
| 2025-09-28 | 113.5% |
| 2024-09-29 | 77.9% |
| 2023-10-01 | 66.2% |
| 2022-10-02 | 88.5% |
| 2021-10-03 | 46.9% |
| 2019-09-29 | 54.4% |
Coverage worsened sharply this year, 77.9% to 113.5%, after no clear trend before it. One year is not a trend, but it is worth knowing which direction the last one moved.
2% of the 44 consumer discretionary here pay out more — at the demanding end.
The arithmetic
- GAAP earnings — dividends declared per share $2.45 ÷ diluted EPS $1.63
- Operating cash flow — dividends paid $2,771m ÷ operating cash flow $4,748m
- Free cash flow — dividends paid $2,771m ÷ (operating cash flow $4,748m − capex $2,306m)
Where the figures came from
- 10-K filed 2025-11-14 · accession 0000829224-25-000114
All public at sec.gov — you should not have to take our word for it.
Computed straight from SEC XBRL. A number that looks wrong to you is more useful to us than agreement — tell us.
What the free cash flow payout ratio measures, and where every company here sits on it.
Also on: rated not covered · when it files.
When this changes
Every figure above is recomputed whenever Starbucks files. The monthly letter carries what filed, what moved, and one finding computed across every company here.