COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
LVS vs PLNT
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. LVS scored 66.5, PLNT scored 63.1 — LVS leads.
Compare another set
LVS
Las Vegas Sands Corp.
66.5
$46.23 · $29.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
3.4
LVS leads
PLNT
Planet Fitness, Inc.
63.1
$51.70 · $3.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestPLNT17.6x
- Fastest growthLVS+18.1%
- Highest qualityLVS92 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueLVS-48%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
LVS
stronger →← stronger
PLNT
92
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
66
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
64
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
76
LVS and PLNT split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
LVS
PLNT
$2.7bB
FCF
$262mC
+18.1%B+
Rev
+12.7%B+
17.9xB
P/E
17.6xB
1.13B+
PEG
0.92B+
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
LVS
PLNT
48% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
15% below
~-7%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~4%/yr
+69%
1-yr DCF upside
+5%
+94%
5-yr DCF upside
+18%
+138%
10-yr DCF upside
+40%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
LVS
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
- Cyclical growth
PLNT
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
The companies
LVSLas Vegas Sands Corp.
Why now
Resorts & Casinos · market cap $29.9b. Down 34% from 52-week high of $70.45 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +18%, comfortably above the S&P median. 19 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $59.07 (implying +28% upside).
Moat
Net margin 13% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. FCF converts 157% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 34% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
PLNTPlanet Fitness, Inc.
Why now
Leisure · market cap $3.9b. Down 55% from 52-week high of $114.26 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.92 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $67.54 (implying +31% upside).
Moat
Net margin 17% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. FCF converts 110% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 55% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. ROE -39% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where LVS and PLNT diverge
On the headline score the gap is 3.4 points in favor of LVS. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityLVS 92.2 · PLNT 65.8LVS +26.4
- ValueLVS 63.8 · PLNT 76.4PLNT +12.6
- GrowthLVS 50.0 · PLNT 50.0level
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.