LVS vs MAR Stock Comparison
LVS currently leads MAR in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 53 vs 50. The clearest difference is quality, while MAR has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between LVS and MAR?
LVS leads the current stock comparison as Las Vegas Sands Corp., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Las Vegas Sands Corp. vs Marriott International, Inc.
LVS leads
LVS leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from MAR.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support LVS, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Las Vegas Sands Corp.
Marriott International, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LVS over MAR, 53 versus 50 as of Oct 22, 2026. LVS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while MAR holds the stronger momentum profile. LVS also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LVS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. LVS lead: Reversed — MAR led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; LVS now leads by 3.
Compare Las Vegas Sands Corp. and Marriott International, 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 MAR 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 91MAR +45
- Quality63 vs 39LVS +24
- Value49 vs 26LVS +23
- Risk Resilience50 vs 54MAR +4
3 of 6 evidence groups favor LVS. LVS’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; MAR keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
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 +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
LVS's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LVS and MAR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LVS (Las Vegas Sands Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
MAR (Marriott International, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, technicals.
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
LVSLVS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MARMAR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
LVSLVS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
MARMAR on the Momentum factor, by 45 points.
Lower downside
MARMAR on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
LVSLVS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | LVS | MAR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +58.4% | -3.9% | LVS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +35.3% | +27.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 12 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | LVS | MAR |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 4.83% | 40.63% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.790 | $0.480 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.000 | $2.640 |
| Years increased | — | — |
| No cut in window | — | — |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
MAR grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 40.63% a year against LVS's 4.83%.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LVS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 53 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | LVSon balance | revenue growth -12% vs 6.3%; EPS growth -37.6% vs 18.3%; TTM ROE 142% vs -66.7%; gross margin 50.9% vs 20.2%; operating margin 23.3% vs 15.8% — LVS takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | LVS | Value 49 vs 26 |
| Technicals | MAR | Price vs 50-day -9.4% vs 14.2%; vs 200-day -23.6% vs 12.5% |
| Risk Resilience | MAR | Risk Resilience 50 vs 54 |
| Analyst expectations | LVS | Target upside 58.4% vs -3.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LVS and MAR 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 narrow at 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 LVS.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20LVS lead: Reversed — MAR led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; LVS now leads by 3.
- Today
- LVS +3
- 53 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 50 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- MAR +3
- 47 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- LVS +13
- 48 vs 35
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Sep 28 when MAR 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
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (20.62%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
5 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only MAR
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.18%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
LVS 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).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.68%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1MAR closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to LVS's edge.
- 2MAR's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3LVS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
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 | MAR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -12% | 6.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -37.6% | 18.3% |
| Gross margin | 50.9% | 20.2% |
| Operating margin | 23.3% | 15.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 142% | -66.7% |
| Debt to equity | 26.27 | -3.93 |
Performance
MAR leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | LVS | MAR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3.1% | 6.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.9% | 14.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -15.6% | 7.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -33.7% | 5.8% |
| Year to date | -41.4% | 28.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -22.3% | 49.6% |
Technicals
MAR has the stronger structure| Metric | LVS | MAR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.1 | 84.8 |
| ADX (14) | 42.8 | 33.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.4% | 14.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -23.6% | 12.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 23.3% | 19.1% |
Risk
MAR is the more resilient| Metric | LVS | MAR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.61 | 0.58 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.69 | 1.54 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.88 | 2.64 |
| Max drawdown | -48.5% | -18.3% |
| Current drawdown | -45.1% | -1.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.9% | 27.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LVS or MAR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LVS is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 53 against MAR's 50. The edge comes from quality and value. MAR is not without a case — it holds the better momentum profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. 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 MAR the better buy right now?
LVS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LVS over MAR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MAR leads Momentum by 45 points; LVS leads Quality by 24 points; LVS leads Value by 23 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LVS or MAR?
Analyst price targets imply +58.4% upside for LVS and -3.9% for MAR, so the Street currently favors LVS. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, LVS or MAR?
LVS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LVS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 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 MAR?
MAR 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 MAR?
MAR on the Momentum factor, by 45 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 MAR?
MAR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MAR on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 MAR?
LVS leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 50.9% vs 20.2%; operating margin 23.3% vs 15.8%; ttm roe 142% vs -66.7%.
Is LVS's lead over MAR getting stronger or weaker?
LVS lead: Reversed — MAR led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; LVS now leads by 3. 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 2026-09-28, when MAR moved ahead of LVS.
What would change the LVS vs MAR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MAR closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to LVS's edge; MAR's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; LVS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about LVS and MAR?
LVS: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. MAR: 5 bullish / 2 bearish, 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 MAR it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare LVS and MAR 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.