STUB
StubHub Holdings, Inc.
Software - Application
Market Cap$4.02B
5Y Perf.-12.2%
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisSTUB
SEAT
LYV
MSGS
Try popular comparisons:
Stock Comparison
STUB vs SEAT vs LYV vs MSGS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
SEAT
Vivid Seats Inc.
Internet Content & Information
Market Cap$64M
5Y Perf.-96.0%
LYV
Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.
Entertainment
Market Cap$40.09B
5Y Perf.+253.5%
MSGS
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.
Entertainment
Market Cap$9.26B
5Y Perf.+171.6%
STUB vs SEAT vs LYV vs MSGS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot |  STUB |  SEAT |  LYV |  MSGS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Internet Content & Information | Entertainment | Entertainment |
| Market Cap | $4.02B | $64M | $40.09B | $9.26B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.79B | $533M | $25.61B | $1.08B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1.84B | $-438M | $84M | $-22M |
| Gross Margin | 81.2% | 68.4% | 40.3% | 22.9% |
| Operating Margin | -71.7% | -71.4% | 3.4% | -2.3% |
| Forward P/E | 22.8x | — | — | — |
| Total Debt | $1.51B | $20M | $12.44B | $1.18B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.24B | $103M | $7.11B | $153M |
STUB vs SEAT vs LYV vs MSGS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
STUB
SEAT
LYV
MSGS
| Stock | Oct 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivid Seats Inc. (SEAT) | 100 | 4.0 | -96.0% |
| Live Nation Enterta… (LYV) | 100 | 353.5 | +253.5% |
| Madison Square Gard… (MSGS) | 100 | 271.6 | +171.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: STUB vs SEAT vs LYV vs MSGS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: LYV leads in 3 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and profitability and margin quality. Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. is the stronger pick specifically for capital preservation and lower volatility and recent price momentum and sentiment. STUB also leads in specific categories worth noting. This set spans 2 sectors — these stocks serve different portfolio roles, not just different price points.
🥇LYV emerged as the overall leader. Track its performance:
STUB
StubHub Holdings, Inc.
The Value Play
STUB is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Better valuation composite
Best for: value
SEAT
Vivid Seats Inc.
The Secondary Option
SEAT lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Best for: communication services exposure
LYV
Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.
The Income Pick
LYV carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.83
- Rev growth 8.8%, EPS growth -108.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 14.7%
- 6.4% 10Y total return vs MSGS's 367.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.83, current ratio 1.00x
Best for: income & stability and growth exposure
MSGS
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.
The Defensive Choice
MSGS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if stability and momentum is your priority.
- Beta 0.60 vs STUB's 1.77
- +103.0% vs SEAT's -78.4%
Best for: stability and momentum
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth |  LYV | 8.8% revenue growth vs SEAT's -26.4% |
| Value |  STUB | Better valuation composite |
| Quality / Margins | LYV | 0.3% margin vs STUB's -102.3% |
| Stability / Safety |  MSGS | Beta 0.60 vs STUB's 1.77 |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | MSGS | +103.0% vs SEAT's -78.4% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | LYV | 0.4% ROA vs SEAT's -48.9%, ROIC 19.7% vs -10.3% |
STUB vs SEAT vs LYV vs MSGS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
FY 2025
FY 2025
FY 2025
STUB vs SEAT vs LYV vs MSGS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLLYVLAGGINGSEAT
Who Leads Where
LYV leads in 2 of 6 categories
STUB leads 1 • MSGS leads 1 • SEAT leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓SEATVivid Seats Inc.
0leads
MSGSMadison Square Garden…
1leads
STUBStubHub Holdings, Inc.
1leads
LYVLive Nation Entertain…
2leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs STUBvs MSGSMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
STUB4/6
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
Tied
—
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
LYV6/9
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
MSGS5/6
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
Tied
—
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
LYV1/1
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
STUB leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LYV is the larger business by revenue, generating $25.6B annually — 48.1x SEAT's $533M. LYV is the more profitable business, keeping 0.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to STUB's -102.3%. On growth, STUB holds the edge at +12.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | STUBStubHub Holdings,… |  SEATVivid Seats Inc. | LYVLive Nation Enter… | MSGSMadison Square Ga… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.8B | $533M | $25.6B | $1.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$1.3B | -$329M | $1.6B | -$21M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1.8B | -$438M | $84M | -$22M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $322M | -$35M | $1.2B | $55M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +81.2% | +68.4% | +40.3% | +22.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -71.7% | -71.4% | +3.4% | -2.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -102.3% | -82.2% | +0.3% | -2.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +18.0% | -6.5% | +4.8% | +5.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +12.2% | -23.3% | +12.1% | +1.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +189.2% | -43.6% | -4.8% | -40.7% |
STUB leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — STUB and SEAT each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, LYV's 20.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than MSGS's 571.0x.
| Metric | STUBStubHub Holdings,… | SEATVivid Seats Inc. | LYVLive Nation Enter… | MSGSMadison Square Ga… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.0B | $64M | $40.1B | $9.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.3B | -$18M | $45.4B | $10.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.99x | -0.11x | -718.79x | -413.63x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 22.83x | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | -1.97x | 20.54x | 571.00x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.30x | 0.11x | 1.59x | 8.91x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.04x | — | 21.99x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 21.02x | — | 120.16x | 105.26x |
Evenly matched — STUB and SEAT each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LYV leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LYV delivers a 4.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $4 in annual profit, vs $-3 for SEAT. STUB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.78x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LYV's 6.84x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LYV scores 5/9 vs SEAT's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | STUBStubHub Holdings,… | SEATVivid Seats Inc. | LYVLive Nation Enter… | MSGSMadison Square Ga… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -94.3% | -3.5% | +4.4% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -34.4% | -48.9% | +0.4% | -1.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -39.1% | -10.3% | +19.7% | +1.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -32.9% | -5.4% | +13.4% | +1.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.78x | — | 6.84x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $265M | -$82M | $5.3B | $1.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.2B | $103M | $7.1B | $153M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.5B | $20M | $12.4B | $1.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -11.89x | -26.45x | 3.68x | -0.44x |
LYV leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MSGS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MSGS five years ago would be worth $22,290 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $628 for SEAT. Over the past 12 months, MSGS leads with a +103.0% total return vs SEAT's -78.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MSGS at 29.6% vs SEAT's -63.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | STUBStubHub Holdings,… | SEATVivid Seats Inc. | LYVLive Nation Enter… | MSGSMadison Square Ga… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.8% | +10.9% | +18.7% | +48.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -47.9% | -78.4% | +22.1% | +103.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.9% | -95.3% | +101.4% | +117.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.9% | -93.7% | +99.7% | +122.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.9% | -93.7% | +640.7% | +367.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -19.5% | -63.8% | +26.3% | +29.6% |
MSGS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LYV and MSGS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSGS is the less volatile stock with a 0.60 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than STUB's 1.77 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LYV currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs SEAT's 18.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | STUBStubHub Holdings,… | SEATVivid Seats Inc. | LYVLive Nation Enter… | MSGSMadison Square Ga… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.77x | 1.70x | 0.83x | 0.60x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $27.89 | $41.20 | $175.25 | $397.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.74 | $5.06 | $125.34 | $186.00 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +41.1% | +18.8% | +98.4% | +96.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 69.3 | 51.7 | 62.6 | 80.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.9M | 97K | 2.3M | 227K |
Evenly matched — LYV and MSGS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
LYV leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: STUB as "Hold", LYV as "Buy", MSGS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 14.6% upside for STUB (target: $13) vs 5.9% for MSGS (target: $407).
| Metric | STUBStubHub Holdings,… | SEATVivid Seats Inc. | LYVLive Nation Enter… | MSGSMadison Square Ga… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | — | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $13.13 | — | $185.75 | $407.20 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 9 | — | 44 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $0.03 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.0% | +28.4% | +0.1% | +0.1% |
LYV leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Key Takeaway
LYV leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). STUB leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
Best OverallLive Nation Entertainment, … (LYV)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
STUB vs SEAT vs LYV vs MSGS: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is STUB or SEAT or LYV or MSGS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.
(LYV) is the stronger pick with 8. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -26. 4% for Vivid Seats Inc. (SEAT). Analysts rate Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. (LYV) a "Buy" — based on 44 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 — STUB or SEAT or LYV or MSGS?
Over the past 5 years, Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.
(MSGS) delivered a total return of +122. 9%, compared to -93. 7% for Vivid Seats Inc. (SEAT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LYV returned +640. 7% versus SEAT's -93. 7%. 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 — STUB or SEAT or LYV or MSGS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.
(MSGS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 60β versus StubHub Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 77β — meaning STUB is approximately 195% more volatile than MSGS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, StubHub Holdings, Inc. (STUB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 78% versus 7% for Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — STUB or SEAT or LYV or MSGS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.
(LYV) is pulling ahead at 8. 8% versus -26. 4% for Vivid Seats Inc. (SEAT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. grew EPS -108. 8% year-over-year, compared to -62. 8% for Vivid Seats Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, STUB leads at 19. 0% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — STUB or SEAT or LYV or MSGS?
Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.
(LYV) is the more profitable company, earning 2. 0% net margin versus -109. 2% for StubHub Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 2. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LYV leads at 5. 9% versus -73. 4% for STUB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — STUB leads at 80. 5%, 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.
06Is STUB or SEAT or LYV or MSGS more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for STUB: 14.
6% to $13. 13.
07Which pays a better dividend — STUB or SEAT or LYV or MSGS?
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.
08Is STUB or SEAT or LYV or MSGS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.
(MSGS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 60), +367. 0% 10Y return). StubHub Holdings, Inc. (STUB) carries a higher beta of 1. 77 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSGS: +367. 0%, STUB: -47. 9%), 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.
09What are the main differences between STUB and SEAT and LYV and MSGS?
These companies operate in different sectors (STUB (Technology) and SEAT (Communication Services) and LYV (Communication Services) and MSGS (Communication Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.