Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Marriott International, Inc.
How Marriott International, Inc. stacks up
MAR · against 28 other Consumer Cyclical companies of similar size
Growth
55/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #21 of 29 · scores higher than 29% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score4 peers with a growth score of 50–59, including MAR · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 55?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Its metrics sit close to the Consumer Cyclical norm.
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: 5.5% vs peer median 4.3%
- Revenue growth is close to the peer norm. Revenue growth: 4.7% vs peer median 3.7%
- Earnings per share growth is close to the peer norm. Earnings per share growth: 9.2% vs peer median 4.2%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = MAR, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | MAR | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 29 reported | 4.7% | 8.2% | 25% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 27 reported | 9.2% | 5.9% | 73% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 29 reported | 5.5% | 9.9% | 29% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around MAR| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 79.0B USD | 100 | 61 | |
| 2 | 73.8B EUR (≈$81.2B) | 98 | 58 | |
| 3 | 79.4B USD | 94 | 46 | |
| 3 | 84.3B USD | 94 | 53 | |
| 5 | 458.9B HKD (≈$58.7B) | 82 | 53 | |
| 17 | 72.8B USD | 64 | 50 | |
| 18 | 81.9B USD | 62 | 45 | |
| 19 | 137.5B EUR (≈$151.2B) | 60 | 70 | |
| 20 | 97.6B CHF (≈$112.3B) | 58 | 59 | |
| 21 | 108.6B USD | 55 | 43 | |
| 22 | 186.1B USD | 54 | 49 | |
| 23 | 174.8B EUR (≈$192.3B) | 53 | 56 | |
| 24 | 119.7B USD | 44 | 48 | |
| 25 | 89.1B AUD (≈$58.8B) | 43 | 41 |
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