Wyndham Hotels & Resorts vs Xenia Hotels & Resorts
WH and XHR side by side, both in hotels and motels. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How WH and XHR compare
Wyndham Hotels & Resorts is the larger company, worth 3.0 times as much as Xenia Hotels & Resorts ($5.6B against $1.9B).
Xenia Hotels & Resorts grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.6% versus −2.2% for Wyndham Hotels & Resorts).
Wyndham Hotels & Resorts keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.7% compared with −0.66% at Xenia Hotels & Resorts.
Both pay dividends: Wyndham Hotels & Resorts yields 2.3% and Xenia Hotels & Resorts 2.7%.
Wyndham Hotels & Resorts scores higher on the StockData Score (8 against 5 for Xenia Hotels & Resorts), 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 | WH | XHR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.6B | $1.9B |
| Share price | $75.20 | $20.45 |
| Change, 1 year | 2.3% | 59.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −13.5% | 1.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.84 | 1.10 |
| Employees | 2,000 | 42 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 27.5× | – |
| P/S | 3.9× | 1.7× (better) |
| P/B | 11.6× | 1.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.6× | 9.1× (better) |
| P/FCF | 17.3× | – |
| FCF yield | 5.8% | – |
| Fair value | $51.73 | $18.85 |
| Margin of safety | −45.4% | −8.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −2.2% | 1.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 1.9% | 23.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −37.9% (better) | −111% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −36.2% (better) | −113% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 30.8% |
| Operating margin | 30.3% (better) | 6.7% |
| Net margin | 14.7% (better) | −0.66% |
| FCF margin | 22.8% | – |
| Return on equity | 39.6% (better) | −0.62% |
| Return on invested capital | 10.0% (better) | 5.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 5.57 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.30 | – |
| Interest coverage | 3.0× (better) | 0.9× |
| Current ratio | 0.99 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 1.71 (better) | 0.86 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% | 2.7% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 61.5% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 24.0% (better) | 15.3% |
| Buyback yield | 3.9% (better) | 2.6% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.2% (better) | 5.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 106% | 95.5% |
| Held by insiders | 1.4% | 0.73% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$15.2M | −$5.6M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 10.4% | 4.1% |
Go deeper
- WH stock overview
- WH income statement
- WH valuation and score
- XHR stock overview
- XHR income statement
- XHR valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.