Gambling, Resorts & Casinos
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CHDN vs CZR vs MGM vs PENN vs LVS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gambling, Resorts & Casinos
Gambling, Resorts & Casinos
Gambling, Resorts & Casinos
Gambling, Resorts & Casinos
CHDN vs CZR vs MGM vs PENN vs LVS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Gambling, Resorts & Casinos | Gambling, Resorts & Casinos | Gambling, Resorts & Casinos | Gambling, Resorts & Casinos | Gambling, Resorts & Casinos |
| Market Cap | $6.19B | $5.66B | $9.75B | $2.24B | $35.69B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.95B | $11.56B | $17.72B | $6.96B | $13.74B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $388M | $-485M | $183M | $-843M | $1.84B |
| Gross Margin | 33.8% | 43.9% | 44.2% | 30.6% | 26.7% |
| Operating Margin | 23.6% | 17.8% | 5.2% | -7.9% | 24.6% |
| Forward P/E | 12.7x | — | 21.5x | 22.8x | 16.0x |
| Total Debt | $5.20B | $26.34B | $56.16B | $8.38B | $16.14B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $289M | $887M | $2.06B | $687M | $3.84B |
CHDN vs CZR vs MGM vs PENN vs LVS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Churchill Downs Inc… (CHDN) | 100 | 132.9 | +32.9% |
| Caesars Entertainme… (CZR) | 100 | 246.2 | +146.2% |
| MGM Resorts Interna… (MGM) | 100 | 225.8 | +125.8% |
| PENN Entertainment,… (PENN) | 100 | 51.0 | -49.0% |
| Las Vegas Sands Cor… (LVS) | 100 | 110.8 | +10.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CHDN vs CZR vs MGM vs PENN vs LVS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CHDN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 317.2% 10Y total return vs MGM's 81.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, current ratio 0.60x
- Lower P/E (12.7x vs 16.0x)
- Beta 0.70 vs PENN's 1.34
CZR plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
MGM lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, PENN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
LVS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.09, yield 2.2%
- Rev growth 15.2%, EPS growth 19.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 46.9%
- Beta 1.09, yield 2.2%, current ratio 1.14x
- 15.2% revenue growth vs MGM's 1.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 15.2% revenue growth vs MGM's 1.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.7x vs 16.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 13.4% margin vs PENN's -12.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs PENN's 1.34 | |
| Dividends | 2.2% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs CHDN's 0.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +38.7% vs CHDN's -3.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.5% ROA vs PENN's -5.7%, ROIC 16.9% vs 1.8% |
CHDN vs CZR vs MGM vs PENN vs LVS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CHDN vs CZR vs MGM vs PENN vs LVS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LVS leads in 3 of 6 categories
CHDN leads 0 • CZR leads 0 • MGM leads 0 • PENN leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LVS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MGM is the larger business by revenue, generating $17.7B annually — 6.0x CHDN's $2.9B. LVS is the more profitable business, keeping 13.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PENN's -12.1%. On growth, LVS holds the edge at +25.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.9B | $11.6B | $17.7B | $7.0B | $13.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $932M | $3.5B | $2.0B | -$105M | $4.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $388M | -$485M | $183M | -$843M | $1.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $734M | $538M | $1.7B | -$169M | $2.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +33.8% | +43.9% | +44.2% | +30.6% | +26.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +23.6% | +17.8% | +5.2% | -7.9% | +24.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +13.2% | -4.2% | +1.0% | -12.1% | +13.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +24.9% | +4.7% | +9.8% | -2.4% | +16.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.2% | +2.7% | +4.2% | +8.2% | +25.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +13.7% | +11.1% | -5.9% | +37.5% | +73.5% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CZR and PENN each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.7x trailing earnings, CHDN trades at a 67% valuation discount to MGM's 50.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, CZR's 8.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than MGM's 31.6x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6.2B | $5.7B | $9.8B | $2.2B | $35.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $11.1B | $31.1B | $63.8B | $9.9B | $48.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 16.70x | -11.48x | 50.14x | -2.88x | 22.89x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.65x | — | 21.53x | 22.79x | 15.99x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.17x | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.38x | 8.90x | 31.61x | 13.81x | 10.37x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.12x | 0.49x | 0.56x | 0.32x | 2.74x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.01x | 1.57x | 3.08x | 1.33x | 19.27x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 12.51x | 10.88x | 5.85x | — | 21.58x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LVS leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LVS delivers a 95.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $96 in annual profit, vs $-35 for PENN. PENN carries lower financial leverage with a 4.58x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MGM's 17.14x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LVS scores 7/9 vs PENN's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +35.7% | -12.6% | +5.3% | -34.7% | +95.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.2% | -1.5% | +0.4% | -5.7% | +8.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.4% | +5.4% | +1.7% | +1.8% | +16.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.1% | +7.0% | +2.6% | +2.0% | +19.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 4.92x | 7.15x | 17.14x | 4.58x | 8.34x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.9B | $25.5B | $54.1B | $7.7B | $12.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $289M | $887M | $2.1B | $687M | $3.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.2B | $26.3B | $56.2B | $8.4B | $16.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.25x | 0.90x | 1.52x | -1.02x | 4.25x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LVS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LVS five years ago would be worth $9,806 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,936 for PENN. Over the past 12 months, LVS leads with a +38.7% total return vs CHDN's -3.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LVS at -3.1% vs CZR's -15.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -20.6% | +17.9% | +4.4% | +12.9% | -16.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -3.5% | +2.5% | +20.1% | +6.7% | +38.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -38.3% | -38.6% | -12.3% | -35.3% | -9.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -9.8% | -73.7% | -4.5% | -80.6% | -1.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +317.2% | +302.6% | +81.8% | +11.9% | +52.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -14.9% | -15.0% | -4.3% | -13.5% | -3.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CHDN and MGM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CHDN is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PENN's 1.34 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MGM currently trades 93.1% from its 52-week high vs CHDN's 75.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.70x | 1.24x | 1.24x | 1.31x | 1.09x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $118.46 | $31.58 | $40.94 | $20.61 | $70.45 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $80.24 | $17.95 | $29.19 | $11.65 | $38.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.0% | +88.0% | +93.1% | +81.4% | +76.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.3 | 54.5 | 50.0 | 55.1 | 45.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.0M | 4.6M | 4.4M | 4.4M | 3.9M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CHDN and LVS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CHDN as "Buy", CZR as "Buy", MGM as "Buy", PENN as "Buy", LVS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 63.0% upside for CHDN (target: $145) vs 4.2% for MGM (target: $40). For income investors, LVS offers the higher dividend yield at 2.24% vs CHDN's 0.49%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $144.84 | $30.57 | $39.71 | $20.29 | $69.70 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 23 | 30 | 36 | 47 | 49 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.5% | — | — | — | +2.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 6 | 0 | 0 | — | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.43 | — | — | — | $1.20 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +6.9% | +4.0% | +12.6% | +15.8% | +6.2% |
LVS leads in 3 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 3 categories are tied.
CHDN vs CZR vs MGM vs PENN vs LVS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CHDN or CZR or MGM or PENN or LVS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Las Vegas Sands Corp.
(LVS) is the stronger pick with 15. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 7% for MGM Resorts International (MGM). Churchill Downs Incorporated (CHDN) offers the better valuation at 16. 7x trailing P/E (12. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Churchill Downs Incorporated (CHDN) a "Buy" — based on 23 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — CHDN or CZR or MGM or PENN or LVS?
On trailing P/E, Churchill Downs Incorporated (CHDN) is the cheapest at 16.
7x versus MGM Resorts International at 50. 1x. On forward P/E, Churchill Downs Incorporated is actually cheaper at 12. 7x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CHDN or CZR or MGM or PENN or LVS?
Over the past 5 years, Las Vegas Sands Corp.
(LVS) delivered a total return of -1. 9%, compared to -80. 6% for PENN Entertainment, Inc. (PENN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CHDN returned +313. 9% versus PENN's +11. 7%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CHDN or CZR or MGM or PENN or LVS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Churchill Downs Incorporated (CHDN) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
70β versus PENN Entertainment, Inc. 's 1. 31β — meaning PENN is approximately 88% more volatile than CHDN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, PENN Entertainment, Inc. (PENN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 17% for MGM Resorts International — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CHDN or CZR or MGM or PENN or LVS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Las Vegas Sands Corp.
(LVS) is pulling ahead at 15. 2% versus 1. 7% for MGM Resorts International (MGM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Las Vegas Sands Corp. grew EPS 19. 9% year-over-year, compared to -184. 4% for PENN Entertainment, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LVS leads at 46. 9% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — CHDN or CZR or MGM or PENN or LVS?
Churchill Downs Incorporated (CHDN) is the more profitable company, earning 13.
0% net margin versus -12. 1% for PENN Entertainment, Inc. — meaning it keeps 13. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CHDN leads at 25. 2% versus 3. 9% for PENN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MGM leads at 44. 4%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is CHDN or CZR or MGM or PENN or LVS more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Churchill Downs Incorporated (CHDN) trades at 12.
7x forward P/E versus 22. 8x for PENN Entertainment, Inc. — 10. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CHDN: 63. 0% to $144. 84.
08Which pays a better dividend — CHDN or CZR or MGM or PENN or LVS?
In this comparison, LVS (2.
2% yield), CHDN (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. CZR, MGM, PENN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CHDN or CZR or MGM or PENN or LVS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Churchill Downs Incorporated (CHDN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
70), +313. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CHDN: +313. 9%, PENN: +11. 7%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between CHDN and CZR and MGM and PENN and LVS?
Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: CHDN is a small-cap deep-value stock; CZR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MGM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PENN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LVS is a mid-cap high-growth stock. LVS pays a dividend while CHDN, CZR, MGM, PENN do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.