Travel Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
RCL vs NCLH vs CCL vs VIK vs MAR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Travel Services
Leisure
Travel Services
Travel Lodging
RCL vs NCLH vs CCL vs VIK vs MAR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Travel Services | Travel Services | Leisure | Travel Services | Travel Lodging |
| Market Cap | $75.99B | $7.91B | $33.40B | $26.52B | $93.23B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $18.39B | $10.03B | $26.62B | $6.50B | $26.58B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $4.48B | $568M | $2.76B | $1.15B | $2.58B |
| Gross Margin | 47.2% | 43.0% | 37.4% | 39.0% | 21.4% |
| Operating Margin | 27.9% | 15.9% | 16.8% | 23.1% | 16.0% |
| Forward P/E | 16.4x | 8.2x | 12.2x | 25.2x | 30.4x |
| Total Debt | $22.64B | $14.61B | $27.99B | $5.74B | $17.08B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $825M | $210M | $1.93B | $3.80B | $358M |
RCL vs NCLH vs CCL vs VIK vs MAR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Royal Caribbean Cru… (RCL) | 100 | 190.2 | +90.2% |
| Norwegian Cruise Li… (NCLH) | 100 | 103.7 | +3.7% |
| Carnival Corporatio… (CCL) | 100 | 179.1 | +79.1% |
| Viking Holdings Ltd (VIK) | 100 | 267.3 | +167.3% |
| Marriott Internatio… (MAR) | 100 | 152.2 | +52.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RCL vs NCLH vs CCL vs VIK vs MAR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RCL has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 291.7% 10Y total return vs MAR's 430.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.69, current ratio 0.18x
- 24.4% margin vs NCLH's 5.7%
- 11.1% ROA vs NCLH's 2.5%, ROIC 12.2% vs 7.5%
NCLH is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (8.2x vs 30.4x)
Among these 5 stocks, CCL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
VIK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 21.9%, EPS growth 7.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 27.0%
- 21.9% revenue growth vs NCLH's 3.7%
- +95.1% vs NCLH's -0.5%
MAR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 1.09, yield 0.8%
- Beta 1.09, yield 0.8%, current ratio 0.43x
- Beta 1.09 vs CCL's 2.27
- 0.8% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs RCL's 0.3%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 21.9% revenue growth vs NCLH's 3.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.2x vs 30.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 24.4% margin vs NCLH's 5.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.09 vs CCL's 2.27 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs RCL's 0.3%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +95.1% vs NCLH's -0.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.1% ROA vs NCLH's 2.5%, ROIC 12.2% vs 7.5% |
RCL vs NCLH vs CCL vs VIK vs MAR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
RCL vs NCLH vs CCL vs VIK vs MAR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RCL leads in 2 of 6 categories
VIK leads 1 • MAR leads 1 • NCLH leads 0 • CCL leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RCL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CCL is the larger business by revenue, generating $26.6B annually — 4.1x VIK's $6.5B. RCL is the more profitable business, keeping 24.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NCLH's 5.7%. On growth, VIK holds the edge at +27.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $18.4B | $10.0B | $26.6B | $6.5B | $26.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $6.8B | $2.6B | $7.3B | $1.8B | $4.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $4.5B | $568M | $2.8B | $1.1B | $2.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.4B | -$949M | $2.6B | $1.5B | $3.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +47.2% | +43.0% | +37.4% | +39.0% | +21.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +27.9% | +15.9% | +16.8% | +23.1% | +16.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +24.4% | +5.7% | +10.4% | +17.7% | +9.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.5% | -9.5% | +9.8% | +23.5% | +11.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.3% | +9.6% | +6.6% | +27.8% | +6.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +28.9% | +3.5% | +82.4% | +179.2% | +0.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — NCLH and CCL each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.4x trailing earnings, CCL trades at a 64% valuation discount to MAR's 37.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, NCLH's 8.1x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than MAR's 24.8x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $76.0B | $7.9B | $33.4B | $26.5B | $93.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $97.8B | $22.3B | $59.5B | $28.5B | $110.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 17.99x | 19.13x | 13.37x | 32.67x | 37.08x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 16.43x | 8.20x | 12.24x | 25.24x | 30.38x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 14.99x | 8.14x | 8.18x | 15.93x | 24.77x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.24x | 0.80x | 1.25x | 4.08x | 3.56x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.48x | 3.58x | 3.08x | 33.43x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 61.48x | — | 12.81x | 20.35x | 35.75x |
Profitability & Efficiency
VIK leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
VIK delivers a 2.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $2 in annual profit, vs $22 for CCL. RCL carries lower financial leverage with a 2.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NCLH's 6.61x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), VIK scores 8/9 vs NCLH's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +44.9% | +27.0% | +22.5% | +2.4% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +11.1% | +2.5% | +5.3% | +10.1% | +9.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +12.2% | +7.5% | +8.9% | +37.1% | +25.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +17.3% | +10.2% | +11.8% | +26.3% | +22.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.21x | 6.61x | 2.28x | 5.12x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $21.8B | $14.4B | $26.1B | $1.9B | $16.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $825M | $210M | $1.9B | $3.8B | $358M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $22.6B | $14.6B | $28.0B | $5.7B | $17.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.36x | 1.60x | 3.09x | 4.14x | 5.20x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RCL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RCL five years ago would be worth $34,029 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,046 for NCLH. Over the past 12 months, VIK leads with a +95.1% total return vs NCLH's -0.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RCL at 54.1% vs NCLH's 6.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -0.3% | -24.4% | -12.2% | +16.2% | +12.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +25.1% | -0.5% | +37.9% | +95.1% | +38.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +266.1% | +20.8% | +156.0% | +221.7% | +101.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +240.3% | -39.5% | +1.5% | +221.7% | +145.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +291.7% | -65.0% | -31.1% | +221.7% | +430.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +54.1% | +6.5% | +36.8% | +47.6% | +26.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — VIK and MAR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MAR is the less volatile stock with a 1.09 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CCL's 2.27 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. VIK currently trades 96.5% from its 52-week high vs NCLH's 63.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.69x | 2.26x | 2.27x | 1.85x | 1.09x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $366.50 | $27.18 | $34.03 | $87.00 | $380.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $225.95 | $16.87 | $19.44 | $42.20 | $250.79 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +76.6% | +63.4% | +79.4% | +96.5% | +92.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.3 | 42.5 | 53.4 | 62.0 | 53.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.6M | 21.8M | 27.1M | 2.8M | 1.5M |
Analyst Outlook
MAR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RCL as "Buy", NCLH as "Buy", CCL as "Buy", VIK as "Buy", MAR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 40.4% upside for NCLH (target: $24) vs -7.6% for VIK (target: $78). For income investors, MAR offers the higher dividend yield at 0.76% vs RCL's 0.34%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $353.67 | $24.18 | $36.17 | $77.60 | $372.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 51 | 37 | 47 | 13 | 52 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.3% | — | — | — | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.97 | — | — | — | $2.67 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.5% | +0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.5% |
RCL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). VIK leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
RCL vs NCLH vs CCL vs VIK vs MAR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RCL or NCLH or CCL or VIK or MAR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Viking Holdings Ltd (VIK) is the stronger pick with 21.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 7% for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. (NCLH). Carnival Corporation & plc (CCL) offers the better valuation at 13. 4x trailing P/E (12. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (RCL) a "Buy" — based on 51 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 — RCL or NCLH or CCL or VIK or MAR?
On trailing P/E, Carnival Corporation & plc (CCL) is the cheapest at 13.
4x versus Marriott International, Inc. at 37. 1x. On forward P/E, Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. is actually cheaper at 8. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RCL or NCLH or CCL or VIK or MAR?
Over the past 5 years, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.
(RCL) delivered a total return of +240. 3%, compared to -39. 5% for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. (NCLH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MAR returned +430. 3% versus NCLH's -65. 0%. 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 — RCL or NCLH or CCL or VIK or MAR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Marriott International, Inc.
(MAR) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 09β versus Carnival Corporation & plc's 2. 27β — meaning CCL is approximately 108% more volatile than MAR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (RCL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 7% for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RCL or NCLH or CCL or VIK or MAR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Viking Holdings Ltd (VIK) is pulling ahead at 21.
9% versus 3. 7% for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. (NCLH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Viking Holdings Ltd grew EPS 756. 7% year-over-year, compared to -52. 4% for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CCL leads at 29. 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 — RCL or NCLH or CCL or VIK or MAR?
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.
(RCL) is the more profitable company, earning 23. 8% net margin versus 4. 3% for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. — meaning it keeps 23. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RCL leads at 27. 4% versus 15. 8% for MAR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RCL leads at 46. 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 RCL or NCLH or CCL or VIK or MAR more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.
(NCLH) trades at 8. 2x forward P/E versus 30. 4x for Marriott International, Inc. — 22. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NCLH: 40. 4% to $24. 18.
08Which pays a better dividend — RCL or NCLH or CCL or VIK or MAR?
In this comparison, MAR (0.
8% yield), RCL (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. NCLH, CCL, VIK do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RCL or NCLH or CCL or VIK or MAR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Marriott International, Inc.
(MAR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 09), 0. 8% yield, +430. 3% 10Y return). Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. (NCLH) carries a higher beta of 2. 26 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MAR: +430. 3%, NCLH: -65. 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 RCL and NCLH and CCL and VIK and MAR?
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: RCL is a mid-cap deep-value stock; NCLH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CCL is a mid-cap deep-value stock; VIK is a mid-cap high-growth stock; MAR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. MAR pays a dividend while RCL, NCLH, CCL, VIK 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.