Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Hyatt Hotels Corporation
How Hyatt Hotels Corporation stacks up
H · against 1,552 other Consumer Cyclical companies
Valuation
14/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #1,327 of 1,553 · scores higher than 14% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score155 peers with a valuation score of 10–19, including H · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 14?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Mainly because of its earnings yield, EBITDA yield and free cash flow yield, which are weaker than most Consumer Cyclical peers.
- lower earnings for the price paid: weaker than 78% of peers. Earnings yield: 0.4% vs peer median 4.4%
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 78% of peers. EBITDA yield: 1.9% vs peer median 8.8%
- less free cash flow for the price paid: weaker than 76% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 1.4% vs peer median 6.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = H, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | H | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,527 reported | 0.4% | 4.4% | 22% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,593 reported | 3.9% | 8.8% | 22% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 594 reported | 1.4% | 6.1% | 24% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,536 reported | 18.9% | 57.2% | 16% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around H| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 198.5B KRW (≈$143M) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1 | 623.0B KRW (≈$449M) | 100 | 65 | |
| 1 | 382.5B KRW (≈$275M) | 100 | 57 | |
| 1 | 412.0B KRW (≈$297M) | 100 | 56 | |
| 1 | 1.49T KRW (≈$1.1B) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1,327 | 119M MYR (≈$26M) | 14 | 32 | |
| 1,327 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score