Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Xenia Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
How Xenia Hotels & Resorts, Inc. stacks up
XHR · against 202 other Real Estate companies of similar size
Growth
28/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #157 of 203 · scores higher than 21% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score25 peers with a growth score of 20–29, including XHR · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 28?
Weighted metrics compared with all Real Estate companies.Its metrics sit close to the Real Estate norm.
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: 1.5% vs peer median 3.8%
- Revenue growth is close to the peer norm. Revenue growth: 1.6% vs peer median 3.0%
- Earnings per share turned from a profit to a loss. Earnings per share growth: — vs peer median 11.2%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = XHR, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | XHR | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 204 reported | 1.6% | 4.7% | 36% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 155 reported | 326.7% | 7.4% | 95% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 199 reported | 1.5% | 5.2% | 32% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around XHR| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.2B USD | 100 | 60 | |
| 2 | 6.7B SAR (≈$1.8B) | 98 | 53 | |
| 2 | 6.4B SAR (≈$1.7B) | 98 | 45 | |
| 4 | 1.4B EUR (≈$1.5B) | 97 | 79 | |
| 5 | 2.1B GBP (≈$2.7B) | 96 | 56 | |
| 157 | 3.2B EUR (≈$3.5B) | 28 | 38 | |
| 157 | 4.2B USD | 28 | 18 | |
| 157 | 1.5B USD | 28 | 72 | |
| 157 | 1.2B GBP (≈$1.6B) | 28 | 43 | |
| 157 | 2.1B USD | 28 | 32 | |
| 162 | 11.9B HKD (≈$1.5B) | 27 | 38 | |
| 162 | 2.4B USD | 27 | 52 | |
| 162 | 3.5B SGD (≈$2.6B) | 27 | 33 | |
| 165 | 13.7B HKD (≈$1.8B) | 26 | 33 |
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