CHDN Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Canterbury Park Holding has a net margin of 10.41% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of 10.48%. Churchill Downs's return on equity of 43.25% beat Canterbury Park Holding's return on equity of 5.72%.

Churchill Downs has a consensus price target of $163.02, signalling upside risk potential of 23.28%. On the other hand Canterbury Park Holding has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Churchill Downs has higher upside potential than Canterbury Park Holding, analysts believe Churchill Downs is more attractive than Canterbury Park Holding.

Churchill Downs has a beta of 0.953, which suggesting that the stock is 4.743% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Canterbury Park Holding has a beta of -0.263, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 126.308%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.31%. Canterbury Park Holding offers a yield of 1.34% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.07 per share. Churchill Downs pays 6.49% of its earnings as a dividend. Canterbury Park Holding pays out 13.11% 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 $628.5M, which are larger than Canterbury Park Holding quarterly revenues of $19.3M. Churchill Downs's net income of $65.4M is higher than Canterbury Park Holding's net income of $2M. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 24.09x while Canterbury Park Holding's PE ratio is 22.23x. 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 3.70x versus 1.68x for Canterbury Park Holding. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

DraftKings has a net margin of 10.41% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of -26.81%. Churchill Downs's return on equity of 43.25% beat DraftKings's return on equity of -43.02%.

Churchill Downs has a consensus price target of $163.02, signalling upside risk potential of 23.28%. On the other hand DraftKings has an analysts' consensus of $51.25 which suggests that it could grow by 26.93%. Given that DraftKings has higher upside potential than Churchill Downs, analysts believe DraftKings is more attractive than Churchill Downs.

Churchill Downs has a beta of 0.953, which suggesting that the stock is 4.743% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison DraftKings has a beta of 1.868, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 86.771%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.31%. DraftKings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Churchill Downs pays 6.49% of its earnings as a dividend. DraftKings 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 $628.5M, which are smaller than DraftKings quarterly revenues of $1.1B. Churchill Downs's net income of $65.4M is higher than DraftKings's net income of -$293.7M. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 24.09x while DraftKings'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 3.70x versus 4.27x for DraftKings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Madison Square Garden Entertainment has a net margin of 10.41% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of -13.93%. Churchill Downs's return on equity of 43.25% beat Madison Square Garden Entertainment's return on equity of --.

Churchill Downs has a consensus price target of $163.02, signalling upside risk potential of 23.28%. On the other hand Madison Square Garden Entertainment has an analysts' consensus of $44.57 which suggests that it could grow by 33.45%. Given that Madison Square Garden Entertainment has higher upside potential than Churchill Downs, analysts believe Madison Square Garden Entertainment is more attractive than Churchill Downs.

Churchill Downs has a beta of 0.953, which suggesting that the stock is 4.743% 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 0.31%. Madison Square Garden Entertainment offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Churchill Downs pays 6.49% 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 $628.5M, which are larger than Madison Square Garden Entertainment quarterly revenues of $138.7M. Churchill Downs's net income of $65.4M is higher than Madison Square Garden Entertainment's net income of -$19.3M. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 24.09x while Madison Square Garden Entertainment's PE ratio is 9.13x. 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 3.70x versus 1.68x for Madison Square Garden Entertainment. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

TOCCA Life Holdings has a net margin of 10.41% compared to Churchill Downs's net margin of --. Churchill Downs's return on equity of 43.25% beat TOCCA Life Holdings's return on equity of --.

Churchill Downs has a consensus price target of $163.02, signalling upside risk potential of 23.28%. 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 0.953, which suggesting that the stock is 4.743% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison TOCCA Life Holdings has a beta of 2.059, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 105.873%.

Churchill Downs has a quarterly dividend of $0.41 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.31%. TOCCA Life Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Churchill Downs pays 6.49% 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 $628.5M, which are larger than TOCCA Life Holdings quarterly revenues of --. Churchill Downs's net income of $65.4M is higher than TOCCA Life Holdings's net income of --. Notably, Churchill Downs's price-to-earnings ratio is 24.09x 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 3.70x versus -- for TOCCA Life Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.