Caesars Entertainment vs MGM Resorts International
CZR and MGM side by side, both in hotels and motels. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CZR and MGM compare
MGM Resorts International is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Caesars Entertainment ($7.5B against $5.9B).
MGM Resorts International grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.2% versus 2.4% for Caesars Entertainment).
MGM Resorts International keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.4% compared with −4.0% at Caesars Entertainment.
MGM Resorts International scores higher on the StockData Score (9 against 5 for Caesars Entertainment), 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 | CZR | MGM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.9B | $7.5B |
| Share price | $29.09 | $29.96 |
| Change, 1 year | 55.4% | −4.0% |
| Change, 5 years | −72.7% | −40.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.84 | 1.30 |
| Employees | 50K | 62K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 5 | 9 (better) |
| Valuation score | 4 | 4 |
| Growth score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 18.5× |
| P/S | 0.5× | 0.4× (better) |
| P/B | 1.8× (better) | 3.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 5.2× (better) | 5.7× |
| P/FCF | 9.7× | 5.0× (better) |
| FCF yield | 10.3% | 19.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $60.59 | $40.70 |
| Margin of safety | 52.0% (better) | 26.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2.4% | 3.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 25.9% | 27.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −21.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −11.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 15.9% (better) | 5.7% |
| Net margin | −4.0% | 2.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | 5.2% | 8.4% (better) |
| Return on equity | −12.8% | 15.5% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 10.1% | 15.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 3.47 | 2.41 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.30 | 1.67 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 0.8× | 2.5× (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.85 | 1.33 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.67 | 0.77 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | – | 10.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 10.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.3% | 63.7% |
| Held by insiders | 5.0% | 83.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$18.4M | $75.6M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 10.7% | 46.6% |
Go deeper
- CZR stock overview
- CZR income statement
- CZR valuation and score
- MGM stock overview
- MGM income statement
- MGM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.