Gambling, Resorts & Casinos
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
MSC vs MLCO vs LVS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gambling, Resorts & Casinos
Gambling, Resorts & Casinos
MSC vs MLCO 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 |
| Market Cap | $130M | $2.28B | $35.69B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $695M | $5.16B | $13.74B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-59M | $185M | $1.84B |
| Gross Margin | 52.2% | 36.8% | 26.7% |
| Operating Margin | 10.1% | 11.6% | 24.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | 11.0x | 16.2x |
| Total Debt | $2.05B | $7.02B | $16.14B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $109M | $1.02B | $3.84B |
MSC vs MLCO vs LVS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Studio City Interna… (MSC) | 100 | 18.9 | -81.1% |
| Melco Resorts & Ent… (MLCO) | 100 | 34.9 | -65.1% |
| Las Vegas Sands Cor… (LVS) | 100 | 112.2 | +12.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MSC vs MLCO vs LVS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MSC plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
MLCO is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 11.3%, EPS growth 350.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 56.4%
- Lower P/E (11.0x vs 16.2x)
LVS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.09, yield 2.2%
- 52.5% 10Y total return vs MLCO's -29.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.09, current ratio 1.14x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 15.2% revenue growth vs MSC's 8.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.0x vs 16.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 13.4% margin vs MSC's -8.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.09 vs MLCO's 1.11 | |
| Dividends | 2.2% yield; 2-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +38.7% vs MSC's -10.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.5% ROA vs MSC's -2.1%, ROIC 16.9% vs 2.0% |
MSC vs MLCO vs LVS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MSC vs MLCO vs LVS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LVS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LVS is the larger business by revenue, generating $13.7B annually — 19.8x MSC's $695M. LVS is the more profitable business, keeping 13.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MSC's -8.5%. On growth, LVS holds the edge at +25.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $695M | $5.2B | $13.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $277M | $1.1B | $4.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$59M | $185M | $1.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | $0 | $2.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +52.2% | +36.8% | +26.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.1% | +11.6% | +24.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -8.5% | +3.6% | +13.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +9.2% | +16.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.9% | +8.6% | +25.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +21.4% | +4.1% | +73.5% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — MSC and MLCO each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.4x trailing earnings, MLCO trades at a 46% valuation discount to LVS's 22.9x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, MLCO's 7.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than LVS's 10.4x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $130M | $2.3B | $35.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.1B | $8.3B | $48.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.18x | 12.44x | 22.89x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 11.00x | 16.20x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.32x | 7.25x | 10.37x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.19x | 0.44x | 2.74x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.23x | — | 19.27x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 4.78x | 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 $-10 for MSC. MSC carries lower financial leverage with a 3.57x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LVS's 8.34x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MLCO scores 8/9 vs MSC's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -9.9% | — | +95.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.1% | +2.4% | +8.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.0% | +8.6% | +16.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.6% | +9.1% | +19.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 8 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.57x | — | 8.34x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.9B | $6.0B | $12.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $109M | $1.0B | $3.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.0B | $7.0B | $16.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.54x | 1.30x | 4.25x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LVS leads this category, winning 6 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 $2,199 for MSC. Over the past 12 months, LVS leads with a +38.7% total return vs MSC's -10.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LVS at -3.1% vs MLCO's -23.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -23.5% | -25.4% | -16.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -10.0% | -0.7% | +38.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -55.4% | -55.9% | -9.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -78.0% | -69.2% | -1.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -82.6% | -29.0% | +52.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -23.6% | -23.9% | -3.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MSC and LVS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSC is the less volatile stock with a -0.48 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MLCO's 1.11 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LVS currently trades 76.3% from its 52-week high vs MSC's 40.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.48x | 1.11x | 1.09x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.63 | $10.15 | $70.45 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.13 | $5.22 | $38.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +40.7% | +55.2% | +76.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.7 | 43.2 | 45.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 9K | 1.6M | 3.9M |
Analyst Outlook
LVS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MSC as "Buy", MLCO as "Buy", LVS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 69.6% upside for MLCO (target: $10) vs 29.6% for LVS (target: $70). LVS is the only dividend payer here at 2.24% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $9.50 | $69.70 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 18 | 49 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.0% | +2.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.00 | $1.20 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +7.3% | +6.2% |
LVS leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 2 categories are tied.
MSC vs MLCO vs LVS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MSC or MLCO 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 8. 7% for Studio City International Holdings Limited (MSC). Melco Resorts & Entertainment Limited (MLCO) offers the better valuation at 12. 4x trailing P/E (11. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Studio City International Holdings Limited (MSC) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — MSC or MLCO or LVS?
On trailing P/E, Melco Resorts & Entertainment Limited (MLCO) is the cheapest at 12.
4x versus Las Vegas Sands Corp. at 22. 9x. On forward P/E, Melco Resorts & Entertainment Limited is actually cheaper at 11. 0x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MSC or MLCO or LVS?
Over the past 5 years, Las Vegas Sands Corp.
(LVS) delivered a total return of -1. 9%, compared to -78. 0% for Studio City International Holdings Limited (MSC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LVS returned +52. 5% versus MSC's -82. 6%. 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 — MSC or MLCO or LVS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Studio City International Holdings Limited (MSC) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
48β versus Melco Resorts & Entertainment Limited's 1. 11β — meaning MLCO is approximately -332% more volatile than MSC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Studio City International Holdings Limited (MSC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 8% for Las Vegas Sands Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MSC or MLCO or LVS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Las Vegas Sands Corp.
(LVS) is pulling ahead at 15. 2% versus 8. 7% for Studio City International Holdings Limited (MSC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Melco Resorts & Entertainment Limited grew EPS 350. 0% year-over-year, compared to 19. 9% for Las Vegas Sands Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MSC leads at 291. 8% 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 — MSC or MLCO or LVS?
Las Vegas Sands Corp.
(LVS) is the more profitable company, earning 12. 5% net margin versus -8. 5% for Studio City International Holdings Limited — meaning it keeps 12. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LVS leads at 23. 7% versus 10. 2% for MSC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSC leads at 36. 8%, 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 MSC or MLCO or LVS more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Melco Resorts & Entertainment Limited (MLCO) trades at 11.
0x forward P/E versus 16. 2x for Las Vegas Sands Corp. — 5. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MLCO: 69. 6% to $9. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — MSC or MLCO or LVS?
In this comparison, LVS (2.
2% yield) pays a dividend. MSC, MLCO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MSC or MLCO or LVS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Studio City International Holdings Limited (MSC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
48)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSC: -82. 6%, MLCO: -29. 0%), 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 MSC and MLCO 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: MSC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MLCO is a small-cap deep-value stock; LVS is a mid-cap high-growth stock. LVS pays a dividend while MSC, MLCO 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.