Seek Returns logo

LVS vs. SW: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

Here’s a clear look at LVS and SW, comparing key factors like historical performance, profitability, financial strength, growth, dividend, and valuation.

Company Profile

SymbolLVSSW
Company NameLas Vegas Sands Corp.Smurfit Westrock Plc
CountryUnited StatesIreland
GICS SectorConsumer DiscretionaryMaterials
GICS IndustryHotels, Restaurants & LeisureContainers & Packaging
Market Capitalization36.81 billion USD21.90 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateDecember 15, 2004June 17, 2008
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of LVS and SW by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each. Use the tabs to select the desired time period. Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

LVS vs. SW: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolLVSSW
5-Day Price Return-0.92%-4.05%
13-Week Price Return26.73%-9.57%
26-Week Price Return27.03%-23.24%
52-Week Price Return31.26%-3.54%
Month-to-Date Return2.33%-5.48%
Year-to-Date Return4.40%-22.11%
10-Day Avg. Volume3.87M4.11M
3-Month Avg. Volume5.37M3.61M
3-Month Volatility33.08%31.62%
Beta1.021.10

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

LVS

51.35%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
83.01%
Q3
39.51%
Median
17.38%
Q1
5.32%
Min
-45.92%

In the upper quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, LVS’s Return on Equity of 51.35% signals a highly effective use of shareholder capital to drive profitability compared to most of its peers.

SW

2.94%

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
41.66%
Q3
20.76%
Median
14.35%
Q1
6.55%
Min
3.64%

A Return on Equity of 2.94% places SW below the typical range for the Containers & Packaging industry. This suggests challenges in efficiently using shareholder capital to generate profit, which could point to operational issues or a conservative capital structure.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

LVS

12.16%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
26.45%
Q3
14.67%
Median
8.69%
Q1
3.34%
Min
-11.30%

LVS’s Net Profit Margin of 12.16% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

SW

1.18%

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
11.61%
Q3
8.17%
Median
4.91%
Q1
4.20%
Min
0.08%

Falling into the lower quartile for the Containers & Packaging industry, SW’s Net Profit Margin of 1.18% indicates weaker profitability. This means the company retains a smaller portion of each dollar in sales as profit compared to its competitors.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

LVS

21.36%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
38.76%
Q3
21.15%
Median
14.20%
Q1
6.43%
Min
-14.56%

An Operating Profit Margin of 21.36% places LVS in the upper quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This signals a strong ability to translate revenue into operating profit, outperforming most of its competitors in core business efficiency.

SW

4.20%

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
22.03%
Q3
13.17%
Median
8.87%
Q1
6.86%
Min
0.07%

SW’s Operating Profit Margin of 4.20% is in the lower quartile for the Containers & Packaging industry. This indicates weaker profitability from core operations, which may stem from inefficiencies or competitive pressures on pricing.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolLVSSW
Return on Equity (TTM)51.35%2.94%
Return on Assets (TTM)6.64%1.17%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)12.16%1.18%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)21.36%4.20%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)46.98%19.46%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

LVS

1.22

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
2.68
Q3
1.62
Median
1.11
Q1
0.74
Min
0.19

LVS’s Current Ratio of 1.22 aligns with the median group of the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

SW

1.45

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
2.13
Q3
1.57
Median
1.27
Q1
1.13
Min
0.58

SW’s Current Ratio of 1.45 aligns with the median group of the Containers & Packaging industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

LVS

7.95

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
9.88
Q3
4.54
Median
1.52
Q1
0.27
Min
0.00

LVS’s leverage is in the upper quartile of the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, with a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 7.95. While this approach can boost equity growth, it also exposes the company to greater financial vulnerability.

SW

0.79

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
4.50
Q3
2.23
Median
1.22
Q1
0.54
Min
0.23

SW’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.79 is typical for the Containers & Packaging industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

LVS

5.34

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
26.88
Q3
11.95
Median
3.87
Q1
1.19
Min
-11.84

LVS’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 5.34 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

SW

2.41

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
13.16
Q3
8.10
Median
3.61
Q1
2.94
Min
1.06

In the lower quartile for the Containers & Packaging industry, SW’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 2.41 indicates a tighter cushion for servicing debt, suggesting less financial flexibility than many of its competitors.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolLVSSW
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.221.45
Quick Ratio (MRQ)1.140.95
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)7.950.79
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)5.342.41

Growth

Revenue Growth

LVS vs. SW: A side-by-side comparison of their Revenue Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

EPS Growth

LVS vs. SW: A side-by-side comparison of their EPS Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

Dividend

Dividend Yield (TTM)

LVS

1.93%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
5.88%
Q3
2.37%
Median
0.68%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

LVS’s Dividend Yield of 1.93% is consistent with its peers in the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

SW

3.50%

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
7.37%
Q3
4.07%
Median
3.33%
Q1
1.72%
Min
0.00%

SW’s Dividend Yield of 3.50% is consistent with its peers in the Containers & Packaging industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

LVS

50.71%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
127.31%
Q3
56.79%
Median
19.58%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

LVS’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 50.71% is within the typical range for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

SW

85.87%

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
221.20%
Q3
119.52%
Median
58.05%
Q1
28.91%
Min
0.00%

SW’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 85.87% is within the typical range for the Containers & Packaging industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolLVSSW
Dividend Yield (TTM)1.93%3.50%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)50.71%85.87%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

LVS

26.23

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
59.44
Q3
33.98
Median
22.25
Q1
15.53
Min
7.61

LVS’s P/E Ratio of 26.23 is within the middle range for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

SW

41.59

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
35.98
Q3
27.87
Median
16.15
Q1
14.38
Min
8.20

At 41.59, SW’s P/E Ratio is exceptionally high, exceeding the typical maximum for the Containers & Packaging industry. This suggests the stock may be significantly overvalued compared to its peers and implies high market expectations that could be difficult to meet.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

LVS

3.19

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
7.74
Q3
3.88
Median
2.05
Q1
1.19
Min
0.17

LVS’s P/S Ratio of 3.19 aligns with the market consensus for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This suggests its valuation, based on sales, is seen as standard and is on par with its competitors.

SW

0.49

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
2.91
Q3
1.67
Median
0.83
Q1
0.64
Min
0.30

In the lower quartile for the Containers & Packaging industry, SW’s P/S Ratio of 0.49 indicates its revenue is valued more conservatively than most of its peers. This could present a compelling opportunity if the market has overlooked its sales-generating capabilities.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

LVS

15.44

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
20.90
Q3
9.78
Median
4.29
Q1
2.22
Min
0.47

LVS’s P/B Ratio of 15.44 is in the upper tier for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This indicates that investors are paying a premium relative to the company’s net assets, a valuation that hinges on its ability to generate superior profits.

SW

1.23

Containers & Packaging Industry

Max
5.28
Q3
3.30
Median
2.35
Q1
1.57
Min
0.89

SW’s P/B Ratio of 1.23 is in the lower quartile for the Containers & Packaging industry. From a value investing perspective, this is favorable, as it suggests the stock is trading at a discount to its net asset value and may offer a greater margin of safety.

LVS vs. SW: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Containers & Packaging industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolLVSSW
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)26.2341.59
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)3.190.49
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)15.441.23
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)31.3342.07