CHDN Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Inspired Entertainment has a net margin of 11.94% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of -0.17%. Churchill Downs's return on equity of 40.8% beat Inspired Entertainment's return on equity of --.

Churchill Downs has a consensus price target of $134.13, signalling upside risk potential of 34.36%. On the other hand Inspired Entertainment has an analysts' consensus of $12.00 which suggests that it could grow by 58.31%. Given that Inspired Entertainment has higher upside potential than Churchill Downs, analysts believe Inspired Entertainment is more attractive than Churchill Downs.

Churchill Downs has a beta of 0.944, which suggesting that the stock is 5.567% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Inspired Entertainment has a beta of 1.649, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 64.901%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.41%. Inspired Entertainment offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Churchill Downs pays 6.84% of its earnings as a dividend. Inspired Entertainment pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Churchill Downs's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Churchill Downs quarterly revenues are $642.6M, which are larger than Inspired Entertainment quarterly revenues of $60.4M. Churchill Downs's net income of $76.7M is higher than Inspired Entertainment's net income of -$100K. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 17.76x while Inspired Entertainment's PE ratio is 3.01x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Churchill Downs is 2.67x versus 0.76x for Inspired Entertainment. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Madison Square Garden Entertainment has a net margin of 11.94% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of 3.31%. Churchill Downs's return on equity of 40.8% beat Madison Square Garden Entertainment's return on equity of --.

Churchill Downs has a consensus price target of $134.13, signalling upside risk potential of 34.36%. On the other hand Madison Square Garden Entertainment has an analysts' consensus of $44.44 which suggests that it could grow by 8.61%. Given that Churchill Downs has higher upside potential than Madison Square Garden Entertainment, analysts believe Churchill Downs is more attractive than Madison Square Garden Entertainment.

Churchill Downs has a beta of 0.944, which suggesting that the stock is 5.567% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Madison Square Garden Entertainment has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.41%. Madison Square Garden Entertainment offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Churchill Downs pays 6.84% of its earnings as a dividend. Madison Square Garden Entertainment pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Churchill Downs's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Churchill Downs quarterly revenues are $642.6M, which are larger than Madison Square Garden Entertainment quarterly revenues of $242.5M. Churchill Downs's net income of $76.7M is higher than Madison Square Garden Entertainment's net income of $8M. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 17.76x while Madison Square Garden Entertainment's PE ratio is 14.93x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Churchill Downs is 2.67x versus 2.02x for Madison Square Garden Entertainment. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Red Rock Resorts has a net margin of 11.94% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of 8.99%. Churchill Downs's return on equity of 40.8% beat Red Rock Resorts's return on equity of 58.75%.

Churchill Downs has a consensus price target of $134.13, signalling upside risk potential of 34.36%. On the other hand Red Rock Resorts has an analysts' consensus of $51.67 which suggests that it could grow by 1.45%. Given that Churchill Downs has higher upside potential than Red Rock Resorts, analysts believe Churchill Downs is more attractive than Red Rock Resorts.

Churchill Downs has a beta of 0.944, which suggesting that the stock is 5.567% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Red Rock Resorts has a beta of 1.614, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 61.374%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.41%. Red Rock Resorts offers a yield of 1.96% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share. Churchill Downs pays 6.84% of its earnings as a dividend. Red Rock Resorts pays out 76.86% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Churchill Downs quarterly revenues are $642.6M, which are larger than Red Rock Resorts quarterly revenues of $497.9M. Churchill Downs's net income of $76.7M is higher than Red Rock Resorts's net income of $44.7M. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 17.76x while Red Rock Resorts's PE ratio is 19.74x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Churchill Downs is 2.67x versus 2.43x for Red Rock Resorts. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

TOCCA Life Holdings has a net margin of 11.94% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of --. Churchill Downs's return on equity of 40.8% beat TOCCA Life Holdings's return on equity of --.

Churchill Downs has a consensus price target of $134.13, signalling upside risk potential of 34.36%. On the other hand TOCCA Life Holdings has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Churchill Downs has higher upside potential than TOCCA Life Holdings, analysts believe Churchill Downs is more attractive than TOCCA Life Holdings.

Churchill Downs has a beta of 0.944, which suggesting that the stock is 5.567% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison TOCCA Life Holdings has a beta of 2.412, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 141.239%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.41%. TOCCA Life Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Churchill Downs pays 6.84% of its earnings as a dividend. TOCCA Life Holdings pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Churchill Downs's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Churchill Downs quarterly revenues are $642.6M, which are larger than TOCCA Life Holdings quarterly revenues of --. Churchill Downs's net income of $76.7M is higher than TOCCA Life Holdings's net income of --. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 17.76x while TOCCA Life Holdings's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Churchill Downs is 2.67x versus -- for TOCCA Life Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.