ABNB vs. RH: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at ABNB and RH, comparing key factors like performance, valuation metrics, dividends, and financial strength. It’s built for investors or anyone curious to see how these two stocks match up.
Company Overview
ABNB dominates in value with a market cap of 79.88 billion USD, eclipsing RH’s 3.66 billion USD by roughly 21.81×.
RH carries a higher beta at 2.36, indicating it’s more sensitive to market moves, while ABNB remains steadier at 1.15.
| Symbol | ABNB | RH |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Airbnb, Inc. | RH |
| Country | US | US |
| Sector | Consumer Cyclical | Consumer Cyclical |
| Industry | Travel Services | Specialty Retail |
| CEO | Mr. Brian Chesky | Mr. Gary G. Friedman |
| Price | 127.52 USD | 195.6 USD |
| Market Cap | 79.88 billion USD | 3.66 billion USD |
| Beta | 1.15 | 2.36 |
| Exchange | NASDAQ | NYSE |
| IPO Date | December 10, 2020 | November 2, 2012 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of ABNB and RH over the past year by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each (starting one year ago).
Hover over the lines to see the investment’s value and total return (%) at specific dates.
Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.
Valuation Metrics Comparison
The section examines key financial ratios to assess the valuation of ABNB and RH based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- RH carries a sub-zero price-to-book ratio of -22.28, indicating negative equity. In contrast, ABNB (P/B 9.98) has positive book value.
- RH reports a negative Price-to-Free Cash Flow ratio of -17.14, showing a cash flow shortfall that could threaten its operational sustainability, while ABNB at 18.16 maintains positive cash flow.
| Symbol | ABNB | RH |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | 31.20 | 50.33 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | 1.52 | 1.51 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 7.11 | 1.15 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 9.98 | -22.28 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | 18.16 | -17.14 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | 29.23 | 16.47 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 6.64 | 2.38 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | 16.95 | -35.43 |
Dividend Comparison
Neither ABNB nor RH currently pays a dividend yield; this often indicates they are reinvesting earnings for growth, prioritizing long-term expansion over immediate cash returns to shareholders.
| Symbol | ABNB | RH |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of ABNB and RH, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- RH posts a quick ratio of 0.30, indicating limited coverage of short-term debts from its most liquid assets—while ABNB at 1.27 enjoys stronger liquidity resilience.
- RH has negative equity (debt-to-equity ratio -24.07), suggesting asset shortfalls, whereas ABNB at 0.29 preserves healthier equity coverage.
- RH carries a debt-to-assets ratio of 0.86, suggesting substantial asset funding via debt, while ABNB at 0.09 opts for a more conservative financing structure.
- ABNB shows “--” for interest coverage, hinting at negligible interest costs, whereas RH (at 1.42) covers its interest obligations.
| Symbol | ABNB | RH |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 1.27 | 1.43 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 1.27 | 0.30 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 0.29 | -24.07 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.09 | 0.86 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | -- | 1.42 |