We Think Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership (TSE:QSP.UN) Is Taking Some Risk With Its Debt

Some say volatility, rather than debt, is the best way to think about risk as an investor, but Warren Buffett famously said that 'Volatility is far from synonymous with risk.' So it seems the smart money knows that debt - which is usually involved in bankruptcies - is a very important factor, when you assess how risky a company is. As with many other companies Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership (TSE:QSP.UN) makes use of debt. But is this debt a concern to shareholders?

Why Does Debt Bring Risk?

Debt and other liabilities become risky for a business when it cannot easily fulfill those obligations, either with free cash flow or by raising capital at an attractive price. Ultimately, if the company can't fulfill its legal obligations to repay debt, shareholders could walk away with nothing. While that is not too common, we often do see indebted companies permanently diluting shareholders because lenders force them to raise capital at a distressed price. By replacing dilution, though, debt can be an extremely good tool for businesses that need capital to invest in growth at high rates of return. The first thing to do when considering how much debt a business uses is to look at its cash and debt together.

Check out our latest analysis for Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership

What Is Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership's Net Debt?

As you can see below, at the end of December 2020, Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership had US$12.9b of debt, up from US$12.0b a year ago. Click the image for more detail. However, it also had US$1.56b in cash, and so its net debt is US$11.3b.

A Look At Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership's Liabilities

We can see from the most recent balance sheet that Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership had liabilities of US$1.60b falling due within a year, and liabilities of US$17.5b due beyond that. On the other hand, it had cash of US$1.56b and US$536.0m worth of receivables due within a year. So it has liabilities totalling US$17.0b more than its cash and near-term receivables, combined.

This deficit is considerable relative to its very significant market capitalization of US$21.7b, so it does suggest shareholders should keep an eye on Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership's use of debt. This suggests shareholders would be heavily diluted if the company needed to shore up its balance sheet in a hurry.

We use two main ratios to inform us about debt levels relative to earnings. The first is net debt divided by earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA), while the second is how many times its earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) covers its interest expense (or its interest cover, for short). The advantage of this approach is that we take into account both the absolute quantum of debt (with net debt to EBITDA) and the actual interest expenses associated with that debt (with its interest cover ratio).

Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership has a rather high debt to EBITDA ratio of 6.4 which suggests a meaningful debt load. However, its interest coverage of 3.1 is reasonably strong, which is a good sign. Worse, Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership's EBIT was down 22% over the last year. If earnings continue to follow that trajectory, paying off that debt load will be harder than convincing us to run a marathon in the rain. The balance sheet is clearly the area to focus on when you are analysing debt. But it is Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership's earnings that will influence how the balance sheet holds up in the future. So if you're keen to discover more about its earnings, it might be worth checking out this graph of its long term earnings trend.

But our final consideration is also important, because a company cannot pay debt with paper profits; it needs cold hard cash. So it's worth checking how much of that EBIT is backed by free cash flow. Over the most recent three years, Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership recorded free cash flow worth 59% of its EBIT, which is around normal, given free cash flow excludes interest and tax. This free cash flow puts the company in a good position to pay down debt, when appropriate.

Our View

On the face of it, Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership's net debt to EBITDA left us tentative about the stock, and its EBIT growth rate was no more enticing than the one empty restaurant on the busiest night of the year. But on the bright side, its conversion of EBIT to free cash flow is a good sign, and makes us more optimistic. Overall, it seems to us that Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership's balance sheet is really quite a risk to the business. For this reason we're pretty cautious about the stock, and we think shareholders should keep a close eye on its liquidity. There's no doubt that we learn most about debt from the balance sheet. But ultimately, every company can contain risks that exist outside of the balance sheet. For example, we've discovered 2 warning signs for Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership (1 is potentially serious!) that you should be aware of before investing here.

At the end of the day, it's often better to focus on companies that are free from net debt. You can access our special list of such companies (all with a track record of profit growth). It's free.

If you decide to trade Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership, use the lowest-cost* platform that is rated #1 Overall by Barron’s, Interactive Brokers. Trade stocks, options, futures, forex, bonds and funds on 135 markets, all from a single integrated account. Promoted

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
^*Interactive Brokers Rated Lowest Cost Broker by StockBrokers.com Annual Online Review 2020

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.