Madison Square Garden Sports vs Seaport Entertainment
MSGS and SEG side by side, both in miscellaneous amusement and recreation. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MSGS and SEG compare
Madison Square Garden Sports is the larger company, worth 32 times as much as Seaport Entertainment ($9.4B against $289M).
Madison Square Garden Sports grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (11.0% versus 3.1% for Seaport Entertainment).
Madison Square Garden Sports keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 0.67% compared with −103% at Seaport Entertainment.
Madison Square Garden Sports pays a dividend yielding 1.8%; Seaport Entertainment does not pay one.
Seaport Entertainment scores higher on the StockData Score (8 against 6 for Madison Square Garden Sports), 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 | MSGS | SEG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $9.4B | $289M |
| Share price | $388.63 | $22.56 |
| Change, 1 year | 72.3% | −6.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 105% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.61 | 0.83 |
| Employees | 522 | 627 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 8 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 1214× | – |
| P/S | 8.1× | 2.4× (better) |
| P/B | – | 0.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 295× | – |
| P/FCF | 153× | – |
| FCF yield | 0.65% | – |
| Fair value | $27.32 | $61.40 |
| Margin of safety | −1323% | 63.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 11.0% (better) | 3.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 22.6% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 2.5% (better) | −101% |
| Net margin | 0.67% (better) | −103% |
| FCF margin | 5.3% | – |
| Return on equity | – | −27.0% |
| Return on invested capital | – | −28.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.93 | – |
| Interest coverage | 1.4× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.50 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 3.56 (better) | 0.24 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.8% | – |
| Payout ratio | 6.1% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.8% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 76.6% | 86.9% |
| Held by insiders | 41.2% | 58.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.1M | – |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 11.9% | 11.8% |
Go deeper
- MSGS stock overview
- MSGS income statement
- MSGS valuation and score
- SEG stock overview
- SEG income statement
- SEG valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.