Scientific Games Competitors

Las Vegas Sands (NYSE:LVS) and Scientific Games (NASDAQ:SGMS) are both consumer discretionary companies, but which is the better stock? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, dividends, valuation, risk, institutional ownership, analyst recommendations and earnings.

Valuation and Earnings

This table compares Las Vegas Sands and Scientific Games' revenue, earnings per share and valuation.

Las Vegas Sands has higher revenue and earnings than Scientific Games. Las Vegas Sands is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Scientific Games, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Institutional and Insider Ownership

37.3% of Las Vegas Sands shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 89.5% of Scientific Games shares are held by institutional investors. 10.8% of Las Vegas Sands shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 40.6% of Scientific Games shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a breakdown of current ratings and price targets for Las Vegas Sands and Scientific Games, as reported by MarketBeat.com.

Las Vegas Sands presently has a consensus price target of $58.0938, suggesting a potential downside of 4.76%. Scientific Games has a consensus price target of $38.75, suggesting a potential downside of 18.25%. Given Las Vegas Sands' stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Las Vegas Sands is more favorable than Scientific Games.

Volatility & Risk

Las Vegas Sands has a beta of 1.35, meaning that its share price is 35% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Scientific Games has a beta of 2.11, meaning that its share price is 111% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Profitability

This table compares Las Vegas Sands and Scientific Games' net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Summary

Las Vegas Sands beats Scientific Games on 9 of the 14 factors compared between the two stocks.

MGM Resorts International (NYSE:MGM) and Scientific Games (NASDAQ:SGMS) are both consumer discretionary companies, but which is the better stock? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, dividends, valuation, risk, institutional ownership, analyst recommendations and earnings.

Valuation and Earnings

This table compares MGM Resorts International and Scientific Games' revenue, earnings per share and valuation.

MGM Resorts International has higher revenue and earnings than Scientific Games. MGM Resorts International is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Scientific Games, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Institutional and Insider Ownership

63.4% of MGM Resorts International shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 89.5% of Scientific Games shares are held by institutional investors. 5.1% of MGM Resorts International shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 40.6% of Scientific Games shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a breakdown of current ratings and price targets for MGM Resorts International and Scientific Games, as reported by MarketBeat.com.

MGM Resorts International presently has a consensus price target of $29.5625, suggesting a potential downside of 26.57%. Scientific Games has a consensus price target of $38.75, suggesting a potential downside of 18.25%. Given Scientific Games' stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Scientific Games is more favorable than MGM Resorts International.

Volatility & Risk

MGM Resorts International has a beta of 2.42, meaning that its share price is 142% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Scientific Games has a beta of 2.11, meaning that its share price is 111% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Profitability

This table compares MGM Resorts International and Scientific Games' net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Summary

MGM Resorts International beats Scientific Games on 8 of the 14 factors compared between the two stocks.

Caesars Entertainment (NASDAQ:CZR) and Scientific Games (NASDAQ:SGMS) are both consumer discretionary companies, but which is the better stock? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, dividends, valuation, risk, institutional ownership, analyst recommendations and earnings.

Volatility & Risk

Caesars Entertainment has a beta of 3.15, meaning that its share price is 215% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Scientific Games has a beta of 2.11, meaning that its share price is 111% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a breakdown of current ratings and price targets for Caesars Entertainment and Scientific Games, as reported by MarketBeat.com.

Caesars Entertainment presently has a consensus price target of $80.4688, suggesting a potential downside of 14.07%. Scientific Games has a consensus price target of $38.75, suggesting a potential downside of 18.25%. Given Caesars Entertainment's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Caesars Entertainment is more favorable than Scientific Games.

Valuation and Earnings

This table compares Caesars Entertainment and Scientific Games' revenue, earnings per share and valuation.

Caesars Entertainment has higher earnings, but lower revenue than Scientific Games. Caesars Entertainment is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Scientific Games, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Profitability

This table compares Caesars Entertainment and Scientific Games' net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Institutional and Insider Ownership

90.7% of Caesars Entertainment shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 89.5% of Scientific Games shares are held by institutional investors. 0.4% of Caesars Entertainment shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 40.6% of Scientific Games shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Summary

Caesars Entertainment beats Scientific Games on 8 of the 14 factors compared between the two stocks.

Scientific Games (NASDAQ:SGMS) and Penn National Gaming (NASDAQ:PENN) are both computer and technology companies, but which is the superior investment? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their analyst recommendations, dividends, valuation, earnings, profitability, risk and institutional ownership.

Risk & Volatility

Scientific Games has a beta of 2.11, indicating that its stock price is 111% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Penn National Gaming has a beta of 2.79, indicating that its stock price is 179% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Analyst Ratings

This is a summary of recent recommendations for Scientific Games and Penn National Gaming, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

Scientific Games presently has a consensus target price of $38.75, suggesting a potential downside of 18.25%. Penn National Gaming has a consensus target price of $95.6842, suggesting a potential downside of 4.26%. Given Penn National Gaming's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Penn National Gaming is more favorable than Scientific Games.

Valuation & Earnings

This table compares Scientific Games and Penn National Gaming's top-line revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

Penn National Gaming has higher revenue and earnings than Scientific Games. Scientific Games is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Penn National Gaming, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Profitability

This table compares Scientific Games and Penn National Gaming's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Institutional and Insider Ownership

89.5% of Scientific Games shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 87.5% of Penn National Gaming shares are held by institutional investors. 40.6% of Scientific Games shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 1.8% of Penn National Gaming shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Summary

Penn National Gaming beats Scientific Games on 9 of the 14 factors compared between the two stocks.

Scientific Games (NASDAQ:SGMS) and Wynn Resorts (NASDAQ:WYNN) are both computer and technology companies, but which is the superior investment? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their analyst recommendations, dividends, valuation, earnings, profitability, risk and institutional ownership.

Risk & Volatility

Scientific Games has a beta of 2.11, indicating that its stock price is 111% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Wynn Resorts has a beta of 2.32, indicating that its stock price is 132% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Institutional and Insider Ownership

89.5% of Scientific Games shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 69.5% of Wynn Resorts shares are held by institutional investors. 40.6% of Scientific Games shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 0.8% of Wynn Resorts shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Valuation & Earnings

This table compares Scientific Games and Wynn Resorts' top-line revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

Wynn Resorts has higher revenue and earnings than Scientific Games. Wynn Resorts is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Scientific Games, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Analyst Ratings

This is a summary of recent recommendations for Scientific Games and Wynn Resorts, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

Scientific Games presently has a consensus target price of $38.75, suggesting a potential downside of 18.25%. Wynn Resorts has a consensus target price of $108.4375, suggesting a potential downside of 14.80%. Given Wynn Resorts' higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Wynn Resorts is more favorable than Scientific Games.

Profitability

This table compares Scientific Games and Wynn Resorts' net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Scientific Games (NASDAQ:SGMS) and Churchill Downs (NASDAQ:CHDN) are both mid-cap computer and technology companies, but which is the better investment? We will compare the two businesses based on the strength of their analyst recommendations, risk, dividends, profitability, earnings, institutional ownership and valuation.

Risk & Volatility

Scientific Games has a beta of 2.11, indicating that its share price is 111% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Churchill Downs has a beta of 1.37, indicating that its share price is 37% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a summary of recent ratings for Scientific Games and Churchill Downs, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

Scientific Games currently has a consensus target price of $38.75, suggesting a potential downside of 18.25%. Churchill Downs has a consensus target price of $200.80, suggesting a potential downside of 9.00%. Given Churchill Downs' stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts clearly believe Churchill Downs is more favorable than Scientific Games.

Valuation and Earnings

This table compares Scientific Games and Churchill Downs' top-line revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

Churchill Downs has lower revenue, but higher earnings than Scientific Games. Churchill Downs is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Scientific Games, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

89.5% of Scientific Games shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 73.0% of Churchill Downs shares are held by institutional investors. 40.6% of Scientific Games shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 4.3% of Churchill Downs shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, large money managers and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Profitability

This table compares Scientific Games and Churchill Downs' net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Summary

Churchill Downs beats Scientific Games on 8 of the 13 factors compared between the two stocks.