LVS vs LYV Stock Comparison
LYV currently leads LVS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 53. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between LVS and LYV?
LYV leads the current stock comparison as Live Nation Entertainment, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Las Vegas Sands Corp. vs Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.
LYV leads
LYV leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 10 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors LVS on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support LYV, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Las Vegas Sands Corp.
Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LYV over LVS, 59 versus 53 as of Oct 22, 2026. LYV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience. LYV also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors LVS. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LYV today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. LYV lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Las Vegas Sands Corp. and Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare LVS and LYV against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Momentum46 vs 60LYV +14
- Risk Resilience50 vs 60LYV +10
- Value49 vs 57LYV +8
- Quality63 vs 60Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor LYV. LYV’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +11
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
LYV's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LVS and LYV both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LYV (Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
LVS (Las Vegas Sands Corp.): the counter-case, on fundamentals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 23.3% against 17.7%.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
LYVLYV on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
LYVLYV on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
LYVLYV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points.
Momentum
LYVLYV on the Momentum factor, by 14 points.
Lower downside
LYVLYV on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
LVSLVS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors LYV, analyst targets favor LVS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | LVS | LYV | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +58.4% | +14.6% | LVS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +35.3% | +61% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LYV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | LYV | 53 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | LVSon balance | revenue growth -12% vs 102.1%; EPS growth -37.6% vs 157.3%; TTM ROE 142% vs 73.3%; gross margin 50.9% vs 44.8%; operating margin 23.3% vs 3.4% — LVS takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | LYV | Value 49 vs 57 |
| Technicals | LYV | Price vs 50-day -9.4% vs -0.3%; vs 200-day -23.6% vs 5.6% |
| Risk Resilience | LYV | Risk Resilience 50 vs 60 |
| Analyst expectations | LVS | Target upside 58.4% vs 14.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LVS and LYV and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 6 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on LYV.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20LYV lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LYV +6
- 53 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- LYV +7
- 50 vs 57
- 30 sessions ago
- LYV +10
- 47 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- LYV +11
- 48 vs 59
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Aug 3 when LYV moved ahead of LVS.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only LVS
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (20.62%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only LYV
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.60%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, MACD Bullish Crossover.
LYV leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.73%, AIQ +2 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.26%, AIQ +3 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1LVS closes the Momentum gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to LYV's edge.
- 2LVS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3LYV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate LYV's advantage entirely.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
LVS leads on balance| Metric | LVS | LYV |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -12% | 102.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -37.6% | 157.3% |
| Gross margin | 50.9% | 44.8% |
| Operating margin | 23.3% | 3.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 142% | 73.3% |
| Debt to equity | 26.27 | 137.04 |
Performance
LYV leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | LVS | LYV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3.1% | 2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.9% | 2.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -15.6% | -1.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -33.7% | 14% |
| Year to date | -41.4% | 22.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -22.3% | 15.2% |
Technicals
LYV has the stronger structure| Metric | LVS | LYV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.1 | 61.1 |
| ADX (14) | 42.8 | 8.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.4% | -0.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -23.6% | 5.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 23.3% | 17.7% |
Risk
LYV is the more resilient| Metric | LVS | LYV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.61 | 0.69 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.69 | 0.41 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.88 | 0.61 |
| Max drawdown | -48.5% | -20.1% |
| Current drawdown | -45.1% | -7.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.9% | 30.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -2.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LVS or LYV?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LYV is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 59 against LVS's 53. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is LVS or LYV the better buy right now?
LYV carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LYV over LVS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LYV leads Momentum by 14 points; LYV leads Risk Resilience by 10 points; LYV leads Value by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LVS or LYV?
Analyst price targets imply +58.4% upside for LVS and +14.6% for LYV, so the Street currently favors LVS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors LYV. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, LVS or LYV?
LYV is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LYV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, LVS or LYV?
LYV on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, LVS or LYV?
LYV on the Momentum factor, by 14 points. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, LVS or LYV?
LYV is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LYV on Risk Resilience, by 10 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is LVS more profitable than LYV?
LVS leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 50.9% vs 44.8%; operating margin 23.3% vs 3.4%; ttm roe 142% vs 73.3%.
Is LYV's lead over LVS getting stronger or weaker?
LYV lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 6 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-08-03, when LYV moved ahead of LVS.
What would change the LVS vs LYV verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LVS closes the Momentum gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to LYV's edge; LVS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; LYV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate LYV's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about LVS and LYV?
LVS: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. LYV: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on LVS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On LYV it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare LVS and LYV with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.