Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. (MSGS) vs Formula One Group (FWONK) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | MSGS | 1.2% revenue growth vs FWONK's -100.0% |
| Value | MSGS | Better valuation composite |
| Quality / Margins | FWONK | 43.8% net margin vs MSGS's -1.5% |
| Stability / Safety | FWONK | Beta 0.51 vs MSGS's 0.66 |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | MSGS | +62.8% vs FWONK's -5.0% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | FWONK | 42.6% ROA vs MSGS's -1.1% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. is a professional sports holding company that owns major league franchises including the New York Knicks (NBA) and New York Rangers (NHL). It generates revenue primarily from media rights deals, ticket sales and premium seating, and arena sponsorships — with media rights being the largest contributor. The company's moat lies in its ownership of iconic, geographically-protected professional sports franchises in the lucrative New York market, which creates scarcity value and strong brand loyalty.
Formula One Group is the commercial rights holder for the global Formula 1 motorsport championship. It generates revenue primarily from race promotion fees (about 30%), media rights sales (about 35%), and sponsorship deals (about 20%), with the remainder from hospitality and other sources. Its key moat is the exclusive, long-term commercial rights to the world's premier motorsport series — a globally recognized brand with high barriers to entry.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
MSGS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Valuation Metrics). FWONK leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
MSGS and FWONK operate at a comparable scale, with $1.1B and $1.0B in trailing revenue. FWONK is the more profitable business, keeping 43.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MSGS's -1.5%. On growth, MSGS holds the edge at +12.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | MSGSMadison Square Ga… | FWONKFormula One Group |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.1B | $1.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $8M | $231M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$17M | $449M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $3M | $279M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +25.9% | -18.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +0.4% | -3.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -1.5% | +43.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +0.3% | +27.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +12.8% | -2.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.5% | +100.0% |
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | MSGSMadison Square Ga… | FWONKFormula One Group |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.5B | $20.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.5B | $19.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -356.62x | — |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 52.13x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 140.57x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.45x | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 17.08x | 22.48x |
Profitability & Efficiency
On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MSGS scores 5/9 vs FWONK's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | MSGSMadison Square Ga… | FWONKFormula One Group |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.1% | +42.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.5% | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.5% | -0.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.0B | -$1.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $153M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.2B | $0 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.73x | 3.35x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in FWONK five years ago would be worth $20,766 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $16,534 for MSGS. Over the past 12 months, MSGS leads with a +62.8% total return vs FWONK's -5.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MSGS at 20.2% vs FWONK's 11.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | MSGSMadison Square Ga… | FWONKFormula One Group |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +28.1% | -6.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +62.8% | -5.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +73.5% | +39.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +65.3% | +107.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +340.5% | +269.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +20.2% | +11.6% |
Risk & Volatility
FWONK is the less volatile stock with a 0.51 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MSGS's 0.66 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MSGS currently trades 96.0% from its 52-week high vs FWONK's 83.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | MSGSMadison Square Ga… | FWONKFormula One Group |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.66x | 0.51x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $345.46 | $109.36 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $173.26 | $75.26 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.0% | +83.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 65.7 | 44.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 195K | 1.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates MSGS as "Buy" and FWONK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 30.2% upside for FWONK (target: $119) vs -0.6% for MSGS (target: $330).
| Metric | MSGSMadison Square Ga… | FWONKFormula One Group |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $329.75 | $119.25 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 28 | 24 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.0% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.03 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.8% | 0.0% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Mar 20 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Madison Square Gard… (MSGS) | 100 | 215.99 | +116.0% |
| Formula One Group (FWONK) | 100 | 230.02 | +130.0% |
Formula One Group (FWONK) returned +108% over 5 years vs Madison Square Gard… (MSGS)'s +65%. A $10,000 investment in FWONK 5 years ago would be worth $20,766 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Madison Square Gard… (MSGS) | $1.1B | $1.0B | -6.8% |
| Formula One Group (FWONK) | $0.00 | $0.00 | — |
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.'s revenue grew from $1.1B (2016) to $1.0B (2025) — a -0.8% CAGR. Formula One Group's revenue grew from $0M (2016) to $0M (2025) — a 0.0% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Madison Square Gard… (MSGS) | -6.9% | -2.2% | +68.8% |
| Formula One Group (FWONK) | 14.3% | -0.8% | -105.7% |
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.'s net margin went from -7% (2016) to -2% (2025).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 5 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2024 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Madison Square Gard… (MSGS) | 22.4 | 92.5 | +312.9% |
| Formula One Group (FWONK) | 27.8 | 101.8 | +266.2% |
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. has traded in a 22x–96x P/E range over 4 years; current trailing P/E is ~-357x. Formula One Group has traded in a 27x–102x P/E range over 3 years; current trailing P/E is ~102x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Madison Square Gard… (MSGS) | -3.12 | -0.93 | +70.2% |
| Formula One Group (FWONK) | 1.02 | 0 | -100.0% |
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.'s EPS grew from $-3.12 (2016) to $-0.93 (2025). Formula One Group's EPS grew from $1.02 (2016) to $0.00 (2025) — a -100% CAGR.
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. generated $88M FCF in 2025 (+346% vs 2021). Formula One Group generated $908M FCF in 2025 (+96% vs 2021).
MSGS vs FWONK: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MSGS or FWONK a better buy right now?
Analysts rate Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. (MSGS) a "Buy" — based on 28 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 is the better long-term investment — MSGS or FWONK?
Over the past 5 years, Formula One Group (FWONK) delivered a total return of +107.7%, compared to +65.3% for Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. (MSGS). A $10,000 investment in FWONK five years ago would be worth approximately $21K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSGS returned +340.5% versus FWONK's +269.5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — MSGS or FWONK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Formula One Group (FWONK) is the lower-risk stock at 0.51β versus Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.'s 0.66β — meaning MSGS is approximately 31% more volatile than FWONK relative to the S&P 500.
04Which has better profit margins — MSGS or FWONK?
Formula One Group (FWONK) is the more profitable company, earning 43.8% net margin versus -2.2% for Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. — meaning it keeps 43.8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSGS leads at 1.4% versus -3.4% for FWONK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSGS leads at 27.0%, 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.
05Is MSGS or FWONK more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FWONK: 30.2% to $119.25.
06Which pays a better dividend — MSGS or FWONK?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend. All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
07Is MSGS or FWONK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Formula One Group (FWONK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.51), +269.5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FWONK: +269.5%, MSGS: +340.5%), 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.
08What are the main differences between MSGS and FWONK?
Both stocks operate in the Communication Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. 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 beat both.
- Sector: Communication Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Revenue Growth > 6%
- Gross Margin > 15%