PLNT Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

HWH International has a net margin of 13.83% compared to Planet Fitness's net margin of -158.74%. Planet Fitness's return on equity of -- beat HWH International's return on equity of --.

Planet Fitness has a consensus price target of $109.96, signalling upside risk potential of 10.1%. On the other hand HWH International has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Planet Fitness has higher upside potential than HWH International, analysts believe Planet Fitness is more attractive than HWH International.

Planet Fitness has a beta of 1.329, which suggesting that the stock is 32.885% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison HWH International has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Planet Fitness has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. HWH International offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Planet Fitness pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. HWH International pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Planet Fitness quarterly revenues are $340.5M, which are larger than HWH International quarterly revenues of $345.5K. Planet Fitness's net income of $47.1M is higher than HWH International's net income of -$548.5K. Notably, Planet Fitness's price-to-earnings ratio is 49.69x while HWH International'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 Planet Fitness is 7.25x versus 3.25x for HWH International. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Life Time Group Holdings has a net margin of 13.83% compared to Planet Fitness's net margin of 5.6%. Planet Fitness's return on equity of -- beat Life Time Group Holdings's return on equity of 6.46%.

Planet Fitness has a consensus price target of $109.96, signalling upside risk potential of 10.1%. On the other hand Life Time Group Holdings has an analysts' consensus of $37.50 which suggests that it could grow by 16.42%. Given that Life Time Group Holdings has higher upside potential than Planet Fitness, analysts believe Life Time Group Holdings is more attractive than Planet Fitness.

Planet Fitness has a beta of 1.329, which suggesting that the stock is 32.885% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Life Time Group Holdings has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Planet Fitness has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Life Time Group Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Planet Fitness pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Life Time Group Holdings pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Planet Fitness quarterly revenues are $340.5M, which are smaller than Life Time Group Holdings quarterly revenues of $663.3M. Planet Fitness's net income of $47.1M is higher than Life Time Group Holdings's net income of $37.2M. Notably, Planet Fitness's price-to-earnings ratio is 49.69x while Life Time Group Holdings's PE ratio is 43.53x. 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 Planet Fitness is 7.25x versus 2.59x for Life Time Group Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Lucky Strike Entertainment has a net margin of 13.83% compared to Planet Fitness's net margin of 9.43%. Planet Fitness's return on equity of -- beat Lucky Strike Entertainment's return on equity of -203.93%.

Planet Fitness has a consensus price target of $109.96, signalling upside risk potential of 10.1%. On the other hand Lucky Strike Entertainment has an analysts' consensus of $14.80 which suggests that it could grow by 51.33%. Given that Lucky Strike Entertainment has higher upside potential than Planet Fitness, analysts believe Lucky Strike Entertainment is more attractive than Planet Fitness.

Planet Fitness has a beta of 1.329, which suggesting that the stock is 32.885% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Lucky Strike Entertainment has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Planet Fitness has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Lucky Strike Entertainment offers a yield of 2.25% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.06 per share. Planet Fitness pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Lucky Strike Entertainment pays out -29.86% of its earnings as a dividend.

Planet Fitness quarterly revenues are $340.5M, which are larger than Lucky Strike Entertainment quarterly revenues of $300.1M. Planet Fitness's net income of $47.1M is higher than Lucky Strike Entertainment's net income of $28.3M. Notably, Planet Fitness's price-to-earnings ratio is 49.69x while Lucky Strike Entertainment's PE ratio is 19.11x. 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 Planet Fitness is 7.25x versus 1.27x for Lucky Strike Entertainment. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Xponential Fitness has a net margin of 13.83% compared to Planet Fitness's net margin of -51.4%. Planet Fitness's return on equity of -- beat Xponential Fitness's return on equity of --.

Planet Fitness has a consensus price target of $109.96, signalling upside risk potential of 10.1%. On the other hand Xponential Fitness has an analysts' consensus of $14.30 which suggests that it could grow by 74.18%. Given that Xponential Fitness has higher upside potential than Planet Fitness, analysts believe Xponential Fitness is more attractive than Planet Fitness.

Planet Fitness has a beta of 1.329, which suggesting that the stock is 32.885% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Xponential Fitness has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Planet Fitness has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Xponential Fitness offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Planet Fitness pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Xponential Fitness pays out -8.89% of its earnings as a dividend.

Planet Fitness quarterly revenues are $340.5M, which are larger than Xponential Fitness quarterly revenues of $83.8M. Planet Fitness's net income of $47.1M is higher than Xponential Fitness's net income of -$43.1M. Notably, Planet Fitness's price-to-earnings ratio is 49.69x while Xponential Fitness'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 Planet Fitness is 7.25x versus 0.82x for Xponential Fitness. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.