SCHYY Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

MGM China Holdings has a net margin of -- compared to Sands China's net margin of --. Sands China's return on equity of -- beat MGM China Holdings's return on equity of --.

Sands China has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand MGM China Holdings has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Sands China has higher upside potential than MGM China Holdings, analysts believe Sands China is more attractive than MGM China Holdings.

Sands China has a beta of 0.596, which suggesting that the stock is 40.401% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison MGM China Holdings has a beta of 0.220, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 78.024%.

Sands China has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. MGM China Holdings offers a yield of 3.55% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.55 per share. Sands China pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. MGM China Holdings pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Sands China quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than MGM China Holdings quarterly revenues of --. Sands China's net income of -- is lower than MGM China Holdings's net income of --. Notably, Sands China's price-to-earnings ratio is 21.21x while MGM China Holdings's PE ratio is 8.28x. 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 Sands China is 2.88x versus 1.23x for MGM China Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Melco Resorts and Entertainment has a net margin of -- compared to Sands China's net margin of 2.32%. Sands China's return on equity of -- beat Melco Resorts and Entertainment's return on equity of --.

Sands China has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Melco Resorts and Entertainment has an analysts' consensus of $9.15 which suggests that it could grow by 63.1%. Given that Melco Resorts and Entertainment has higher upside potential than Sands China, analysts believe Melco Resorts and Entertainment is more attractive than Sands China.

Sands China has a beta of 0.596, which suggesting that the stock is 40.401% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Melco Resorts and Entertainment has a beta of 1.047, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 4.707%.

Sands China has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Melco Resorts and Entertainment offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Sands China pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Melco Resorts and Entertainment pays out -0.1% of its earnings as a dividend.

Sands China quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Melco Resorts and Entertainment quarterly revenues of $1.2B. Sands China's net income of -- is lower than Melco Resorts and Entertainment's net income of $27.3M. Notably, Sands China's price-to-earnings ratio is 21.21x while Melco Resorts and Entertainment'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 Sands China is 2.88x versus 0.54x for Melco Resorts and Entertainment. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

SJM Holdings has a net margin of -- compared to Sands China's net margin of 1.44%. Sands China's return on equity of -- beat SJM Holdings's return on equity of --.

Sands China has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand SJM Holdings has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Sands China has higher upside potential than SJM Holdings, analysts believe Sands China is more attractive than SJM Holdings.

Sands China has a beta of 0.596, which suggesting that the stock is 40.401% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison SJM Holdings has a beta of 0.798, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 20.156%.

Sands China has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. SJM Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Sands China pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. SJM Holdings pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Sands China quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than SJM Holdings quarterly revenues of $896.8M. Sands China's net income of -- is lower than SJM Holdings's net income of $12.9M. Notably, Sands China's price-to-earnings ratio is 21.21x while SJM 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 Sands China is 2.88x versus 1.39x for SJM Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Wynn Macau has a net margin of -- compared to Sands China's net margin of --. Sands China's return on equity of -- beat Wynn Macau's return on equity of --.

Sands China has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Wynn Macau has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Sands China has higher upside potential than Wynn Macau, analysts believe Sands China is more attractive than Wynn Macau.

Sands China has a beta of 0.596, which suggesting that the stock is 40.401% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Wynn Macau has a beta of 0.598, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 40.248%.

Sands China has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Wynn Macau offers a yield of 2.76% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.10 per share. Sands China pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Wynn Macau pays out 0.03% of its earnings as a dividend. Wynn Macau's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Sands China quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Wynn Macau quarterly revenues of --. Sands China's net income of -- is lower than Wynn Macau's net income of --. Notably, Sands China's price-to-earnings ratio is 21.21x while Wynn Macau's PE ratio is 10.94x. 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 Sands China is 2.88x versus 1.16x for Wynn Macau. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.