Las Vegas Sands vs MGM Resorts International
LVS 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 LVS and MGM compare
Las Vegas Sands is the larger company, worth 3.2 times as much as MGM Resorts International ($23.9B against $7.5B).
On earnings, Las Vegas Sands is cheaper: it trades at 14.4× trailing earnings, against 18.5× for MGM Resorts International.
Las Vegas Sands grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (18.1% versus 3.2% for MGM Resorts International).
Las Vegas Sands keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.6% compared with 2.4% at MGM Resorts International.
Las Vegas Sands pays a dividend yielding 3.1%; MGM Resorts International does not pay one.
Las Vegas Sands scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 9 for MGM Resorts International), 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 | LVS | MGM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $23.9B | $7.5B |
| Share price | $36.97 | $29.96 |
| Change, 1 year | −37.1% | −4.0% |
| Change, 5 years | −13.3% | −40.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.83 | 1.30 |
| Employees | 42K | 62K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 14.4× (better) | 18.5× |
| P/S | 1.7× | 0.4× (better) |
| P/B | 41.2× | 3.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.2× | 5.7× (better) |
| P/FCF | 8.9× | 5.0× (better) |
| FCF yield | 11.3% | 19.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $52.71 | $40.70 |
| Margin of safety | 29.9% (better) | 26.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 18.1% (better) | 3.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 34.7% (better) | 27.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 22.3% (better) | −21.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 29.8% (better) | −11.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 21.5% (better) | 5.7% |
| Net margin | 12.6% (better) | 2.4% |
| FCF margin | 19.7% (better) | 8.4% |
| Return on equity | 134% (better) | 15.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 18.4% (better) | 15.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 26.27 | 2.41 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.71 | 1.67 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 3.9× (better) | 2.5× |
| Current ratio | 1.00 | 1.33 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.28 (better) | 0.77 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.1% | – |
| Payout ratio | 54.3% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.8% | – |
| Buyback yield | 10.6% (better) | 10.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 13.7% (better) | 10.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 41.6% | 63.7% |
| Held by insiders | 66.5% | 83.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$243M | $75.6M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.5% | 46.6% |
Go deeper
- LVS stock overview
- LVS income statement
- LVS 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.