Same-store sales measures the year-over-year change in sales generated by a mature, issuer-defined cohort of restaurants.
Restaurant companies may call the measure comparable sales, comparable restaurant sales, same-restaurant sales, or simply comps. The labels are similar, but the eligibility rules are not standardized.
A simplified formula is:
1Same-Store Sales Growth
2= Current-Period Sales of Comparable Restaurants
3 Ć· Prior-Year Sales of the Same Comparable Cohort
4 - 1Why investors use same-store sales
Total restaurant revenue can grow because existing locations are selling more, because the company opened more locations, or both.
Same-store sales isolates the first question. It is therefore one of the main measures of organic demand at an established restaurant base.
A chain can report strong total revenue growth while same-store sales are weak if unit expansion is doing most of the work. The reverse can also happen when a mature chain has limited footprint growth but strong demand at existing stores.
Traffic and average check drive the result
Restaurant companies frequently decompose comparable sales into two operating drivers:
1Sales per Existing Restaurant
2ā Restaurant Traffic Ć Average CheckFor small percentage changes, this becomes roughly:
1Same-Store Sales Growth
2ā Traffic Growth + Average Check GrowthThe exact relationship is multiplicative, so a 3% increase in traffic and a 2% increase in average check produces about 5.1% sales growth, not exactly 5%.
Restaurant Traffic helps show whether more visits or transactions drove the result. Average Check helps show the contribution from menu pricing, mix, add-ons, delivery, and other spend-per-transaction effects.
The comparable-store cohort matters
Do not compare restaurant comps without reading the cohort definition.
Starbucks' 2025 Form 10-K includes company-operated stores open 13 months or longer in comparable-store sales and excludes foreign-currency translation effects. Darden's fiscal 2026 Form 10-K limits same-restaurant sales to restaurants open and operated by Darden for at least 16 months, with additional exclusions for certain acquired or closing concepts.
Chipotle uses restaurants in operation for at least 13 full calendar months for comparable restaurant sales.
These differences can change the reported growth rate even when underlying restaurant performance is similar.
Same-store sales are not total revenue growth
New restaurant openings are excluded until they satisfy the comparable-store seasoning rule. Closures, acquisitions, conversions, franchise transitions, and temporary closures can also receive different treatment.
That is why total revenue growth is better thought of as a combination of:
1Existing-Unit Growth
2+ Net Unit Expansion
3+ Mix / Ownership / Calendar EffectsRestaurant Unit Growth addresses the footprint-expansion side of that bridge.
Calendar and currency treatment matter
Restaurant fiscal calendars often use 52- or 53-week years. A calendar mismatch can distort year-over-year comparisons if the issuer does not normalize for it.
International chains may also report comparable sales on a constant-currency basis. That can be useful for operating analysis, but it is not the same as reported GAAP revenue growth translated into the reporting currency.
Same-store sales versus average unit volume
Average Unit Volume is a sales level per restaurant. Same-store sales are a growth rate for a comparable cohort.
A company can have a high AUV and declining comps, or a low AUV and rapidly rising comps. The two measures answer different questions.
Filing examples
Chipotle reported a 1.7% decline in 2025 comparable restaurant sales, driven by a 2.9% decline in transactions partly offset by a 1.2% increase in average check. Starbucks' fiscal 2025 comparable-store sales declined 1%, with transactions down 2% and average ticket up 1%. Darden defines same-restaurant sales using a 16-month maturity threshold and separately reports average check and guest-count changes.
Sources:
Bottom line
Same-store sales are a useful measure of mature-store demand, not a standardized industry statistic or a substitute for total revenue growth. Preserve the comparable-store eligibility rule, ownership scope, calendar, currency treatment, closures, acquisitions, traffic definition, and average-check mix before comparing restaurant companies.
Part of the Restaurant Operating Model
See It in Company Research
These companies are examples of how the concept is reported or discussed in public filings. Definitions can differ by issuer; these links open company research rather than a normalized metric comparison.
Continue Research
Continue from the concept into the Grizzly Bulls research surface that best matches the next question. These links are research continuations, not recommendations or required steps.
Compare restaurant companies
Continue into stock comparison for organic growth, profitability, and company-level valuation context.
Explore more topics in the Financial Research Encyclopedia.