CHDN Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Inspired Entertainment has a net margin of 11.94% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of 80.97%. 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 $136.86, signalling upside risk potential of 44%. On the other hand Inspired Entertainment has an analysts' consensus of $12.20 which suggests that it could grow by 56.41%. 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 1.020, which suggesting that the stock is 2.04% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Inspired Entertainment has a beta of 1.660, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 66.025%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.43%. 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 $80.4M. Churchill Downs's net income of $76.7M is higher than Inspired Entertainment's net income of $65.1M. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.91x while Inspired Entertainment's PE ratio is 3.36x. 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 2.54x versus 0.77x for Inspired Entertainment. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Light & Wonder has a net margin of 11.94% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of 10.59%. Churchill Downs's return on equity of 40.8% beat Light & Wonder's return on equity of 44.98%.

Churchill Downs has a consensus price target of $136.86, signalling upside risk potential of 44%. On the other hand Light & Wonder has an analysts' consensus of $112.86 which suggests that it could grow by 38.49%. Given that Churchill Downs has higher upside potential than Light & Wonder, analysts believe Churchill Downs is more attractive than Light & Wonder.

Churchill Downs has a beta of 1.020, which suggesting that the stock is 2.04% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Light & Wonder has a beta of 1.296, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 29.555%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.43%. Light & Wonder 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. Light & Wonder 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 smaller than Light & Wonder quarterly revenues of $774M. Churchill Downs's net income of $76.7M is lower than Light & Wonder's net income of $82M. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.91x while Light & Wonder's PE ratio is 21.73x. 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 2.54x versus 2.27x for Light & Wonder. 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 $136.86, signalling upside risk potential of 44%. On the other hand Madison Square Garden Entertainment has an analysts' consensus of $44.22 which suggests that it could grow by 22.23%. 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 1.020, which suggesting that the stock is 2.04% more 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 0.43%. 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 16.91x while Madison Square Garden Entertainment's PE ratio is 13.20x. 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 2.54x versus 1.79x for Madison Square Garden Entertainment. 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 $136.86, signalling upside risk potential of 44%. 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 1.020, which suggesting that the stock is 2.04% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison TOCCA Life Holdings has a beta of 2.568, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 156.769%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.43%. 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 16.91x 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 2.54x versus -- for TOCCA Life Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.