Boyd Gaming vs Churchill Downs
BYD and CHDN side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BYD and CHDN compare
Churchill Downs is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Boyd Gaming ($6.6B against $5.3B).
On earnings, Boyd Gaming is cheaper: it trades at 3.2× trailing earnings, against 16.3× for Churchill Downs.
Churchill Downs grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.7% versus 1.7% for Boyd Gaming).
Boyd Gaming keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 44.3% compared with 13.8% at Churchill Downs.
Both pay dividends: Boyd Gaming yields 1.1% and Churchill Downs 0.46%.
Boyd Gaming scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 13 for Churchill Downs), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | BYD | CHDN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.3B | $6.6B |
| Share price | $72.83 | $94.83 |
| Change, 1 year | −5.2% | −5.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 8.0% | −21.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.94 | 0.91 |
| Employees | 16K | 9,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 5 | 5 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 3.2× (better) | 16.3× |
| P/S | 1.3× (better) | 2.2× |
| P/B | 2.1× (better) | 4.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.4× (better) | 11.7× |
| P/FCF | 151× | – |
| PEG | 0.06 | – |
| FCF yield | 0.66% | – |
| Fair value | $89.58 | $144.14 |
| Margin of safety | 18.7% | 34.2% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.7% | 5.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.4% | 22.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 222% (better) | −4.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 250% (better) | −0.34% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 16.4% | 24.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 44.3% (better) | 13.8% |
| FCF margin | 0.86% | – |
| Return on equity | 93.3% (better) | 34.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 11.2% (better) | 8.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.05 (better) | 3.56 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.24 (better) | 4.80 |
| Interest coverage | 5.7× (better) | 2.5× |
| Current ratio | 0.77 (better) | 0.36 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.20 (better) | 1.47 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.1% (better) | 0.46% |
| Payout ratio | 3.2% | 7.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 3 | 15 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 7.1% |
| Buyback yield | 12.4% (better) | 1.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 13.5% (better) | 1.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 74.9% | 85.9% |
| Held by insiders | 12.4% | 6.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$26.4M | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.5% | 7.5% |
Go deeper
- BYD stock overview
- BYD income statement
- BYD valuation and score
- CHDN stock overview
- CHDN income statement
- CHDN valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.