REIT - Hotel & Motel
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CLDT vs MAR vs HLT vs PK vs IHG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Travel Lodging
Travel Lodging
REIT - Hotel & Motel
Travel Lodging
CLDT vs MAR vs HLT vs PK vs IHG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | REIT - Hotel & Motel | Travel Lodging | Travel Lodging | REIT - Hotel & Motel | Travel Lodging |
| Market Cap | $469M | $93.23B | $72.93B | $2.25B | $22.11B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $294M | $26.58B | $12.28B | $2.53B | $10.13B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $9M | $2.58B | $1.54B | $-215M | $1.39B |
| Gross Margin | -3.6% | 21.4% | 44.3% | -4.7% | 45.7% |
| Operating Margin | 9.3% | 16.0% | 23.1% | 11.1% | 22.3% |
| Forward P/E | 71.3x | 30.4x | 35.4x | 24.4x | 26.0x |
| Total Debt | $359M | $17.08B | $15.67B | $4.26B | $4.62B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $33M | $358M | $970M | $232M | $1.13B |
CLDT vs MAR vs HLT vs PK vs IHG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chatham Lodging Tru… (CLDT) | 100 | 147.9 | +47.9% |
| Marriott Internatio… (MAR) | 100 | 397.6 | +297.6% |
| Hilton Worldwide Ho… (HLT) | 100 | 403.9 | +303.9% |
| Park Hotels & Resor… (PK) | 100 | 113.8 | +13.8% |
| InterContinental Ho… (IHG) | 100 | 307.1 | +207.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CLDT vs MAR vs HLT vs PK vs IHG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CLDT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.00, Low D/E 46.1%, current ratio 1.06x
- +48.1% vs PK's +21.9%
MAR is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 0.8% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs PK's 12.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
HLT has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 7.7%, EPS growth -0.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.1%
- 6.2% 10Y total return vs MAR's 430.3%
- Beta 0.94, yield 0.2%, current ratio 10.81x
- 7.7% revenue growth vs CLDT's -7.0%
PK is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (24.4x vs 26.0x)
IHG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.2%
- 13.7% margin vs PK's -8.5%
- 26.0% ROA vs PK's -2.6%, ROIC 159.6% vs 2.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 7.7% revenue growth vs CLDT's -7.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (24.4x vs 26.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 13.7% margin vs PK's -8.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.94 vs PK's 1.32 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs PK's 12.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +48.1% vs PK's +21.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 26.0% ROA vs PK's -2.6%, ROIC 159.6% vs 2.2% |
CLDT vs MAR vs HLT vs PK vs IHG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CLDT vs MAR vs HLT vs PK vs IHG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IHG leads in 1 of 6 categories
HLT leads 1 • CLDT leads 0 • MAR leads 0 • PK leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — HLT and IHG each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MAR is the larger business by revenue, generating $26.6B annually — 90.4x CLDT's $294M. IHG is the more profitable business, keeping 13.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PK's -8.5%. On growth, HLT holds the edge at +9.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $294M | $26.6B | $12.3B | $2.5B | $10.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $87M | $4.5B | $3.0B | $612M | $2.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $9M | $2.6B | $1.5B | -$215M | $1.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $60M | $3.1B | $2.2B | $448M | $1.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -3.6% | +21.4% | +44.3% | -4.7% | +45.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.3% | +16.0% | +23.1% | +11.1% | +22.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.1% | +9.7% | +12.6% | -8.5% | +13.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +20.3% | +11.7% | +17.8% | +17.7% | +15.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -1.6% | +6.2% | +9.0% | -1.3% | +2.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.2% | +0.8% | +35.0% | +117.2% | +8.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CLDT and PK each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 30.2x trailing earnings, IHG trades at a 58% valuation discount to CLDT's 71.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, CLDT's 9.2x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HLT's 30.5x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $469M | $93.2B | $72.9B | $2.3B | $22.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $796M | $110.0B | $87.6B | $6.3B | $25.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 71.29x | 37.08x | 52.34x | -7.88x | 30.17x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 30.38x | 35.37x | 24.41x | 25.95x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.23x | 24.77x | 30.53x | 11.17x | 19.05x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.59x | 3.56x | 6.06x | 0.89x | 4.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.64x | — | — | 0.72x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.87x | 35.75x | 35.96x | 22.08x | 25.42x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IHG leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CLDT delivers a 1.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $1 in annual profit, vs $-7 for PK. CLDT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.46x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PK's 1.38x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MAR scores 7/9 vs PK's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +1.2% | — | — | -6.7% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.8% | +9.3% | +9.4% | -2.6% | +26.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.7% | +25.0% | +24.7% | +2.2% | +159.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.4% | +22.6% | +19.0% | +3.1% | +39.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.46x | — | — | 1.38x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $326M | $16.7B | $14.7B | $4.0B | $3.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $33M | $358M | $970M | $232M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $359M | $17.1B | $15.7B | $4.3B | $4.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.69x | 5.20x | 4.42x | -0.01x | 17.19x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HLT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HLT five years ago would be worth $26,146 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,280 for PK. Over the past 12 months, CLDT leads with a +48.1% total return vs PK's +21.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HLT at 30.3% vs CLDT's 2.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +48.2% | +12.5% | +9.4% | +6.2% | +5.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +48.1% | +38.5% | +32.8% | +21.9% | +29.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.9% | +101.8% | +121.3% | +23.4% | +119.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -17.0% | +145.8% | +161.5% | -27.2% | +114.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -29.2% | +430.3% | +615.8% | -11.4% | +275.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.9% | +26.4% | +30.3% | +7.2% | +29.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CLDT and HLT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HLT is the less volatile stock with a 0.94 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PK's 1.32 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CLDT currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs PK's 90.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.00x | 1.09x | 0.94x | 1.32x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.14 | $380.00 | $344.75 | $12.39 | $150.89 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $6.08 | $250.79 | $237.57 | $9.84 | $109.79 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.4% | +92.6% | +92.9% | +90.3% | +97.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.5 | 53.7 | 50.9 | 52.1 | 57.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 280K | 1.5M | 1.6M | 3.9M | 245K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — MAR and PK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CLDT as "Buy", MAR as "Hold", HLT as "Buy", PK as "Hold", IHG as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 10.2% upside for CLDT (target: $11) vs 2.5% for IHG (target: $151). For income investors, PK offers the higher dividend yield at 12.57% vs HLT's 0.19%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $11.00 | $372.50 | $338.45 | $11.50 | $150.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 52 | 49 | 25 | 23 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.8% | +0.2% | +12.6% | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.67 | $0.60 | $1.41 | $1.73 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.9% | +3.5% | +4.5% | +2.0% | +4.1% |
IHG leads in 1 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency). HLT leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.
CLDT vs MAR vs HLT vs PK vs IHG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CLDT or MAR or HLT or PK or IHG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
(HLT) is the stronger pick with 7. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 0% for Chatham Lodging Trust (CLDT). InterContinental Hotels Group PLC (IHG) offers the better valuation at 30. 2x trailing P/E (26. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Chatham Lodging Trust (CLDT) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — CLDT or MAR or HLT or PK or IHG?
On trailing P/E, InterContinental Hotels Group PLC (IHG) is the cheapest at 30.
2x versus Chatham Lodging Trust at 71. 3x. On forward P/E, Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. is actually cheaper at 24. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CLDT or MAR or HLT or PK or IHG?
Over the past 5 years, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
(HLT) delivered a total return of +161. 5%, compared to -27. 2% for Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. (PK). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HLT returned +615. 8% versus CLDT's -29. 2%. 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 — CLDT or MAR or HLT or PK or IHG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
(HLT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 94β versus Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. 's 1. 32β — meaning PK is approximately 40% more volatile than HLT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Chatham Lodging Trust (CLDT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 46% versus 138% for Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CLDT or MAR or HLT or PK or IHG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
(HLT) is pulling ahead at 7. 7% versus -7. 0% for Chatham Lodging Trust (CLDT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Chatham Lodging Trust grew EPS 275. 0% year-over-year, compared to -240. 6% for Park Hotels & Resorts Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HLT leads at 11. 1% 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 — CLDT or MAR or HLT or PK or IHG?
InterContinental Hotels Group PLC (IHG) is the more profitable company, earning 14.
6% net margin versus -11. 1% for Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. — meaning it keeps 14. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IHG leads at 23. 1% versus 8. 9% for PK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HLT leads at 41. 1%, 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 CLDT or MAR or HLT or PK or IHG more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Park Hotels & Resorts Inc.
(PK) trades at 24. 4x forward P/E versus 35. 4x for Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. — 11. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CLDT: 10. 2% to $11. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CLDT or MAR or HLT or PK or IHG?
In this comparison, PK (12.
6% yield), IHG (1. 2% yield), MAR (0. 8% yield), HLT (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. CLDT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CLDT or MAR or HLT or PK or IHG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, InterContinental Hotels Group PLC (IHG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
94), 1. 2% yield, +275. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (IHG: +275. 4%, CLDT: -29. 2%), 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 CLDT and MAR and HLT and PK and IHG?
These companies operate in different sectors (CLDT (Real Estate) and MAR (Consumer Cyclical) and HLT (Consumer Cyclical) and PK (Real Estate) and IHG (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CLDT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MAR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; HLT is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PK is a small-cap income-oriented stock; IHG is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. MAR, PK, IHG pay a dividend while CLDT, HLT 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.