For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page
What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Las Vegas Sands Corp. (LVS) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.
Our current read (analysis of 2026-10-07): Designation Watch · Gem Score +19 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 28 · Value 13 · Sentiment -47 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $37.30 vs $45.49 at analysis
Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable
reference-name attribute you can cite):
profile-header/price-overview— company profile, live quote, market capextended-analysis— the core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memofuture-predictions— our forward price-band predictionsmarket-narrative/ai-findings/gpt-critique— narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)- Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers):
price-history,income-trend,key-metrics,financials(statement tables),insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.
More for machine readers: site briefing at
/llms.txt ·
any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER ·
raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds);
every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.
Las Vegas Sands Corp.
LVS NYSELas Vegas Sands Corp. is a global developer and operator of large-scale integrated resorts focused on gaming, hospitality, and entertainment. The company concentrates its operations in Asia, where it runs landmark properties in Macao, including The Venetian Macao, Sands Macao, The Londoner Macao, The Parisian Macao, and the Four Seasons Hotel Macao, as well as the Marina Bay Sands resort in Singapore. These resorts combine casinos with extensive hotel capacity, luxury retail, restaurants, entertainment venues, and convention and exhibition facilities, catering to both leisure and business travelers. Las Vegas Sands Corp. plays a significant role in the premium mass and tourism-driven gaming markets in Macao and Singapore, supporting local travel, retail, and convention ecosystems. Headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada, the company today derives the majority of its revenue and earnings from its Asian operations, with casino activity remaining its core business within the broader consumer cyclical and travel-related sector.
Price Overview
Price History (1 Year)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
| Period | Revenue | Net Income | Net Margin | YoY/QoQ |
|---|
Key Metrics
EPS (Diluted): 2.35
Total Equity: $1.93B
Shares: 693,000,000
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $3.84B
EBITDA: $4.28B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $3.84B
Revenue: $13.02B
Revenue: $13.02B
Revenue: $13.02B
Total Equity: $1.93B
Tax Rate: 15.7%
Equity: $1.93B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $3.84B
Current Liabilities: $4.22B
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $1.93B
Shares: 693,000,000
Shares: 693,000,000
CapEx: -$1.17B
Shares: 693,000,000
Stock Price: $45.52
Net Income: $1.63B
Industry Benchmarks
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 17, 2026 1:06pm (51d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.2B | $4.1B | $10.4B | $11.3B | $13.0B |
| Cost of Revenue | — | — | — | — | — |
| Gross Profit | — | — | — | — | — |
| Operating Expenses | $4.9B | $4.9B | $8.1B | $8.9B | $10.2B |
| Operating Income | -$689.0M | -$792.0M | $2.3B | $2.4B | $2.8B |
| Net Income | -$961.0M | $1.8B | $1.2B | $1.4B | $1.6B |
| EBITDA | $352.0M | $244.0M | $3.5B | $3.7B | $4.3B |
| EPS | $-1.26 | $2.40 | $1.60 | $1.97 | $2.35 |
| EPS (Diluted) | $-1.26 | $2.40 | $1.60 | $1.96 | $2.35 |
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 17, 2026 12:48pm (51d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash & Equivalents | $1.9B | $6.3B | $5.1B | $3.7B | $3.8B |
| Total Current Assets | $5.5B | $6.7B | $5.8B | $4.3B | $4.8B |
| Total Assets | $20.1B | $22.0B | $21.8B | $20.7B | $21.9B |
| Current Liabilities | $2.6B | $3.9B | $4.4B | $5.8B | $4.2B |
| Long-Term Debt | — | — | — | — | — |
| Total Liabilities | $17.8B | $18.4B | $17.7B | $17.5B | $20.0B |
| Total Equity | $2.2B | $3.7B | $4.1B | $3.2B | $1.9B |
| Retained Earnings | -$148.0M | $1.7B | $2.6B | $3.5B | $4.4B |
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 17, 2026 1:06pm (51d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | — | — | $3.2B | $3.2B | $3.0B |
| Capital Expenditure | -$828.0M | -$651.0M | -$1.0B | -$1.6B | -$1.2B |
| Free Cash Flow | — | — | $2.2B | $1.6B | $1.9B |
| Acquisitions (net) | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) | $835.0M | $1.1B | -$2.1B | -$326.0M | $6.8B |
| Dividends Paid | $0 | $0 | -$305.0M | -$590.0M | -$833.0M |
| Stock Buybacks | $0 | $0 | -$505.0M | -$1.8B | -$2.2B |
| Net Change in Cash | -$212.0M | $4.5B | -$1.2B | -$1.5B | $191.0M |
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 17, 2026 1:06pm (51d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | -2.9% | +152.4% | +8.9% | +15.2% |
| Gross Profit Growth | — | — | — | — |
| Operating Income Growth | -14.9% | +392.0% | +3.8% | +17.3% |
| Net Income Growth | +290.6% | -33.4% | +18.4% | +12.5% |
| EBITDA Growth | -30.7% | +1,343.0% | +5.4% | +15.4% |
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 17, 2026 12:48pm (51d ago)| Date | Dividend | Declaration | Record | Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-04 | $0.30 | — | — | — |
| 2026-05-05 | $0.30 | — | — | — |
| 2026-02-09 | $0.30 | — | — | — |
| 2025-11-04 | $0.25 | — | — | — |
| 2025-08-05 | $0.25 | — | — | — |
| 2025-05-06 | $0.25 | — | — | — |
| 2025-02-10 | $0.25 | — | — | — |
| 2024-11-05 | $0.20 | — | — | — |
| 2024-08-06 | $0.20 | — | — | — |
| 2024-05-06 | $0.20 | — | — | — |
| 2024-02-05 | $0.20 | — | — | — |
| 2023-11-06 | $0.20 | — | — | — |
| 2023-08-07 | $0.20 | — | — | — |
| 2020-03-17 | $0.79 | — | — | — |
| 2019-12-16 | $0.77 | — | — | — |
| 2019-09-17 | $0.77 | — | — | — |
| 2019-06-18 | $0.77 | — | — | — |
| 2019-03-19 | $0.77 | — | — | — |
| 2018-12-17 | $0.75 | — | — | — |
| 2018-09-18 | $0.75 | — | — | — |
Deep Analysis
Risk : Reward — upside vs downside from this company's own quarters
Computed 2026-10-06 02:02A +1σ run of quarters pays +159%; a −1σ run costs 75%. Ratio 2.1:1 (μ 22.6%, σ 40.0% , 16 pairs).
Older method (repeat-worst-quarter): -0.1 : 1
| Case | Growth | Margin | Fair value | vs price ($45.49) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bull — recovery | +8% | 17.3% | $43.42 | -5% |
| Base — stabilizes | +5% | 15.0% | $35.13 | -23% |
| Bear — keeps slipping | +3% | 12.8% | $27.89 | -39% |
| Stress — last quarter repeats | -1% | 10.0% | $20.28 | -55% |
| Upside — a +1σ run of quarters (v2) | +50% | 13.9% | $117.77 | +159% |
| Stress — a −1σ run of quarters (v2) | -17% | 10.3% | $11.59 | -75% |
Narrative Economics
market-narrative step).
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-08-17 16:26The question every valuation on this page silently assumes: is this company likely to grow? Judged forward — the business, its category, the world — against what's already printed.
Claude Reading
Looking at the raw print first: revenue trajectory is 2.68→2.86→2.90→3.18→3.33→3.65→3.59→3.15B. That June 2026 drop to $3.15B breaks the sequential uptrend and margin compressed to 11% from 15.8% the prior quarter — that's not a "decelerating but healthy" pattern, that's a sharp negative inflection the models are underweighting. The March 2026 quarter at $3.59B/15.8% margin was the peak; two consecutive quarters have now printed softer revenue AND softer margins. Annualizing recent quarters gets you ~$13.5-14B revenue and maybe $1.6-1.8B NI — basically flat to where 2025 landed. The "revenue CAGR 12%, earnings CAGR 15.4%" figures are backward-looking artifacts of the 2022→2023 reopening base effect; on a forward-run-rate basis growth has stalled.
Balance sheet disclosure is where I get genuinely skeptical of the bull composite. "Total debt: —" and "debt_to_equity: 0" are almost certainly data errors — LVS historically carries $13-15B in gross debt against $1.93B equity. EV/EBITDA of 6.4x is cheap for a resort operator ONLY if you trust that EV number; if debt is being under-counted in the source data, the true EV/EBITDA is meaningfully higher and the "undervalued" DCF composite is standing on sand. ROE of 84% and P/B of 16x both scream tiny-equity-base distortion from years of buybacks — this is not a quality signal, it's leverage math. ROIC at -1.25 (if real) directly contradicts the "mature earner" thesis; something in the canonical metrics is broken and the synthesis engine appears to have ignored it. Those insider "G-Gift" transactions totaling ~700M shares in a single day against a ~660M share count are almost certainly a data feed artifact (likely a family trust restructuring or Adelson estate transfer coded as multiple gifts), not signal — but no model flagged this as garbage data.
The synthesis says fair value $59.70 (+31%); the thesis evaluator scored -14 (mild bearish); market forces says neutral. That's a real contradiction and the synthesis is the outlier. I side with the thesis evaluator. The bear case is stronger than the composite admits: Macao's VIP-to-mass shift genuinely compresses structural margins (you can see this — LVS pre-COVID ran 25%+ operating margins on similar revenue; now it's 21.6% and slipping), Singapore's MBS is one asset with concentration risk, and the June 2026 print suggests the recovery narrative is already fully harvested. The "melting ice cube" framing in pre-flight is closer to right than the fallen-angel bull case. A careful contrarian would also note: dividend yield 2.53% with 51% payout ratio on FCF that's declining (-8.4% CAGR) — that dividend is not as safe as it looks if 2026 keeps trending down, and a cut would be the exact catalyst that breaks the anchored narrative into unanchored downside.
My read: fair value is closer to $42-48, not $60. At 6.5x a more honest EV/EBITDA (including real debt) on ~$4.5B forward EBITDA and netting debt, you get equity value roughly in-line with today's $45 — this is fairly valued, not a 31% discount. The synthesis composite is being pulled up by a DCF that likely uses the 12% historical revenue CAGR as a forward input, which the last two quarters actively refute. I dissent from "undervalued." The setup that would flip me bullish: a Q3 2026 print above $3.4B with margins back above 13%, confirming June was a one-off (Macao holiday timing, VIP hold variance, etc.). Absent that, this is a value trap dressed up as a fallen angel — the balance sheet leverage the models missed makes downside to $35 as plausible as upside to $55.
GPT Reading
What stands out is that LVS is not a broken business, but it is also not obviously cheap enough for the jurisdiction and earnings-quality risk embedded in it. The operating recovery is real: revenue rose from $11.30B in 2024 to $13.02B in 2025, operating income from $2.40B to $2.82B, and net income from $1.45B to $1.63B. Free cash flow of $1.86B on a $29.9B market cap is a roughly 6.2% FCF yield, which is respectable for a mature casino operator, and operating cash flow of $3.02B says these assets still throw off serious cash when open and functioning normally. Quarterly numbers also show clear year-over-year improvement through 2026: Q1 revenue grew from $2.86B to $3.59B and Q2 from $3.18B to $3.15B is effectively flat sequentially but still up modestly against the prior-year run rate. The business has recovered far enough that a simple “post-COVID rebound” label undersells the earnings base.
But the pattern inside those quarters is less clean than the bullish valuation outputs suggest. After peaking at $3.65B revenue in 2025-12, LVS slipped to $3.59B in 2026-03 and then to $3.15B in 2026-06, a 14% sequential drop in the latest quarter. Net income fell harder, from $567M to $346M, and margin compressed from 15.8% to 11.0%. That is not a disaster in a seasonal resort business, but it does matter when the stock already trades near 19.4x earnings. You are not paying a distressed multiple for deeply cyclical, politically exposed cash flows; you are paying something closer to a normalized consumer-cyclical multiple for a company whose equity base is only $1.93B and whose reported P/B of 16.3x is telling you the accounting balance sheet gives very little cushion. The ROE of 84% is not evidence of a wonderful franchise by itself here; it is mostly a consequence of a thin equity base. Meanwhile the reported ROIC of -1.246 is likely noisy or distorted by accounting, but at minimum it warns against taking surface-level quality metrics at face value.
The market’s apparent hesitation makes sense to me. EV/EBITDA of 6.45x and EV/revenue of 2.12x are not expensive for premier casino assets, especially with $3.84B of cash and a current ratio above 1.1, but they are not so low that they override the specific risk profile. This is a company whose revenue and profit stream is now healthy, yet whose latest quarterly trend is decelerating and whose free cash flow has not compounded with the same strength as earnings. A mature operator with $13B of revenue, 21.7% operating margin, 12.5% net margin, and a 2.5% dividend yield should look compelling if growth is durable; the fact that the stock is only at $45.52 suggests investors are correctly applying a structural discount. I think that discount is warranted. On these numbers, fair value looks closer to the mid-$40s than to the near-$60 signal from the composite model. I can justify upside into the low $50s if margins re-expand, but I do not see enough evidence in the latest quarter to underwrite that today.
The strongest case against my skepticism is straightforward: on annual figures, LVS is executing. Revenue has grown from $10.37B in 2023 to $13.02B in 2025, operating income has expanded by more than $500M over that stretch, and the latest two reported quarters versus prior year show double-digit gains in both sales and earnings. A 6.45x EV/EBITDA multiple for scarce, high-quality resort assets can be argued as plainly cheap, especially if 2026 is only a pause after a strong recovery leg rather than the start of renewed weakness. If quarterly volatility is seasonal or mix-driven, then the latest dip in margin to 11% could reverse quickly, and 2025’s $1.63B of net income could prove conservative relative to normalized earnings power. In that framing, a 19x P/E is not demanding, because EPS is still climbing and the balance sheet has $3.84B of cash to support dividends and investment.
What would change my mind is not a story about asset quality; it is evidence that the earnings base is still climbing despite the visible quarterly stall. If the next two quarters can keep revenue above $3.4B while restoring net margin back toward 13%-15%, I would be more willing to say the market is too pessimistic and that the stock deserves $50-$55. Likewise, if annual free cash flow can move materially above $2.0B while maintaining the dividend, the current valuation would start to look attractive rather than merely acceptable. On the other hand, if revenue stays around $3.1B-$3.3B and net income remains stuck near the latest $346M pace, then the present multiple is too full and the stock belongs closer to $40 than $50.
Grok Reading
The numbers describe a company that has fully exited the COVID wreckage and is now printing cash at scale, yet the market refuses to pay up for it. Annual revenue climbed from $4.11B in 2022 to $11.30B in 2024 and $13.02B in 2025, with operating income swinging from a $792M loss to $2.82B. Trailing net income of $1.63B against a $29.94B market cap produces a 19.4x P/E, while EV/EBITDA of 6.45x and EV/revenue of 2.12x sit well below what a 21.7% operating-margin resort operator with irreplaceable Macao and Singapore real estate would normally command. Free cash flow of $1.86B on only $1.17B of capex delivers a roughly 6.2% FCF yield at $45.52—hardly the profile of a melting ice cube. Sequential quarters through early 2026 still hover in the $3.15–3.65B revenue band with double-digit net margins, confirming the recovery is not a one-quarter mirage. The 15% revenue CAGR and 15% earnings CAGR over the recent window are real; the stock simply trades as if they are temporary.
What the models under-weight is the quality and durability of that cash conversion relative to the geopolitical discount already embedded. Operating cash flow of $3.02B comfortably covers the $1.86B FCF and a 2.5% dividend at a 51% payout, and the $3.84B cash balance provides a buffer. The absurd 16.3x P/B and 84% ROE are artifacts of a shrunken $1.93B equity base—likely years of distributions and the Adelson-era capital structure—rather than evidence of a hollow franchise. Massive June 2026 “G-Gift” insider blocks totaling hundreds of millions of shares read as estate or trust reshuffling, not open-market distribution. At 6.5x EV/EBITDA the market is already pricing permanent Macao impairment; any stabilization in high-end play or continued Singapore outperformance creates asymmetric upside toward the $50–60 zone the composite valuation implies. I read the stock as modestly undervalued on current cash generation alone, with the China-risk discount more than compensating for mid-single-digit growth deceleration.
The sharpest counter-argument is that the VIP-to-mass mix shift is structural margin destruction, not a cycle. FCF CAGR is already negative 8.4% even as reported earnings rise 15%, hinting that either rising maintenance capex or lower-quality mass play is eroding cash conversion. The most recent quarter printed $3.15B revenue and an 11% net margin—down sharply from $3.59B and 15.8% the prior quarter—while the secondary signals flag decelerating quarterly revenue and macro headwinds. Thesis evaluation correctly flags binary regulatory and geopolitical risk as underpriced relative to a 19x earnings multiple that assumes normalized mid-single-digit growth; if Beijing keeps tightening capital controls or further de-emphasizes gaming, the “fortress” cash flows become trapped in a jurisdiction that can rewrite the rules overnight. Thin reported equity and incomplete debt disclosure leave little visible cushion if refinancing windows close. A smart bear argues that 6.5x EV/EBITDA is cheap only if the EBITDA itself is durable, and the narrative fragility around China policy makes that assumption heroic.
I would flip to fairly valued or overvalued on two consecutive quarters of revenue below $3.0B or net margins compressing sustainably under 10%, a material drop in Macao GGR or VIP volumes that management cannot offset with mass-market gains, or any explicit regulatory action that impairs the concession economics. Conversely, sustained Singapore EBITDA growth plus a clear Macao high-end stabilization that pushes FCF back above $2.2B would justify moving conviction higher and chasing a re-rating above $55.
Qwen Reading local experiment · off-panel
The number that should make any buyer pause is the one hiding in plain sight: the most recent quarter, June 2026, posted $3.15B in revenue against $3.18B a year earlier. That is a 1% decline, not the 15% growth the momentum metrics are touting. The "15.2% recent revenue YoY" figure is a trailing-twelve-month artifact that smooths over the fact that the marginal quarter is stalling. More alarming is the margin trajectory within 2026: Q1 printed 15.8% net margin, Q2 collapsed to 11%. A 480-basis-point intra-year compression in a single half is not noise; it is the VIP-to-mass mix shift the bear thesis describes, showing up in real time. The 12% revenue CAGR and 15.4% earnings CAGR are backward-looking numbers heavily weighted by the 2022-to-2023 post-pandemic rebound, and they are not the growth rate the business is generating right now.
The valuation models' "undervalued" verdict at a composite fair value of $50.09 and a signal-adjusted $59.70 is doing heroic forward projection. At 19.4x trailing P/E, the market is already paying for mid-teens earnings growth. But the ROIC is negative at -1.25%, the P/B is a grotesque 16.3x (a byproduct of the thin $1.93B equity base, but it tells you the capital structure is doing the heavy lifting), and FCF is shrinking at an 8.4% CAGR despite revenue more than tripling off the 2022 trough. You are being asked to pay 19x for a company whose return on invested capital is below zero and whose free cash flow is trending down. The 6.4x EV/EBITDA looks attractive only if you ignore that EBITDA is being propped up by a $3.84B cash pile and that the operating margin of 21.7% is compressing quarter over quarter. The "G-Gift" insider block of roughly 700 million shares on June 16 is almost certainly a mechanical corporate action — the paired 87,718,919/87,718,918 share counts are too symmetrical to be discretionary trading — and I would not read sentiment into it either way.
The strongest case against my skepticism is the Singapore asset. Marina Bay Sands is the only integrated resort in a city-state with no direct competitor, and it generates a revenue stream that is structurally insulated from the Macao regulatory overhang. The $3.02B in operating cash flow is real, the $1.86B in FCF is real, and the 51% payout ratio with a 2.5% dividend yield gives the stock a floor that a pure Macao play would not have. A smart opponent would also point out that the 35% drawdown from 52-week highs has already priced in a substantial amount of the China risk, and that 2.4x P/S for a company with irreplaceable real estate in two sovereign jurisdictions is not a rich multiple in absolute terms. I weigh this differently because the Singapore asset, while defensible, is a single-asset business in a market where the government can change the rules, and it does not offset the fact that the Macao half of the portfolio — still the larger revenue contributor — is in a jurisdiction where the VIP whale segment that built LVS's margins is being structurally eroded by policy, not by a temporary cycle.
What would flip my read: a Q3 2026 print showing net margin back above 13% with revenue growth re-accelerating to 8%+ YoY would tell me the Q2 margin dip was a one-time item (a large capex charge, a one-off legal settlement) rather than the beginning of a structural slide. A concrete easing of Chinese outbound travel restrictions or a new Macao gaming license allocation that favors Sands would also change the calculus. Conversely, if the next two quarters show revenue flat or declining with margins in the 9-11% range, the 19x multiple becomes a 22x or 25x forward multiple on shrinking earnings, and the "fallen angel" narrative tips into value-trap territory. The specific number I am watching is the Macao VIP table revenue as a percentage of total gaming revenue; if that ratio continues to drift below 20%, the margin model the market is pricing in simply does not work.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
LVS has clearly emerged from the COVID trough: revenue rebuilt from $4.11B in 2022 to $13.02B in 2025, with operating margin stabilizing in the 21-22% band and net income at $1.63B in 2025. Cash generation is genuine - OCF/NI of 2.24x, accruals at -8% of assets, and FCF of $1.86B (up from -$651M in 2022) all point to real earnings, not accounting artifacts. Liquid cash of $3.84B against a $29.9B market cap plus positive FCF means the business is self-funding. Capital allocation is a real strength: diluted shares fell from 765M in 2023 to 693M in 2025 (roughly -2.4% CAGR), with buybacks running ~21x SBC. Per-share value is being concentrated, not eroded. The Adelson estate gifts are non-directional and the small executive awards are noise; there is no meaningful open-market selling signal. What holds the grade back is structural, not forensic. Altman Z of 2.23 sits in the grey zone, consistent with a capital-intensive, leveraged operator. The business is heavily exposed to Macau and Singapore regulatory/political regimes, and 2021-2022 showed just how violently revenue and margins can collapse under exogenous shock. Gross margin reads as 0 in the table (likely a classification quirk in cost-of-revenue), which I would want to verify against the filing.
Verify before trusting this (6)
- Actual gross margin - the 0% reading is almost certainly a cost-classification artifact; confirm reported GM from 10-K
- Total debt load, maturity ladder, and interest coverage - Altman Z grey zone flags leverage
- Revenue and EBITDA concentration by property (Macau vs Singapore vs other)
- Status and capex commitments for any development projects (e.g., New York bid, Macau concession capex)
- Nature of the 2026 Adelson gifts - likely estate/charitable transfers, but confirm no change in voting control
- Any related-party transactions given continued Adelson family involvement
The e2e composite FV of $50.09 implies ~10% upside from $45.49; the signal-adjusted $59.70 implies ~31%, but I discount that meaningfully since it leans on cyclical recovery assumptions in Macao that are exactly what the market is debating. The EPV floor of $39.44 is the more sobering anchor - it says if Macao does not re-accelerate and margins stall, the stock is worth ~13% less than today. So the range is roughly $39 (no-growth) to $55 (DCF) with a central tendency around $50. Price sits in the lower half of that band.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- Macao mass-market GGR run-rate and margin trajectory in latest quarter
- Singapore MBS EBITDA sustainability post-expansion capex
- Net debt and interest coverage given elevated leverage
- Capital return pace - buyback authorization use vs dividend
- Any updated guidance on New York or Texas development capex commitments
The broad tape is mildly supportive (Risk-On +52, VIX 14.3, S&P near highs), but LVS is a low-beta (0.84) China/Macao-exposed casino name whose story sits outside the leadership of this rally. The active narrative is a fragile fallen-angel with low cult coefficient and moderate intensity, meaning there is no zealous base defending the stock and no momentum crowd chasing it. The bear frame (structural China crackdown, capital controls, permanently smaller VIP whale pool) is winning the tape right now, and a 24% EPS miss with sales 6.5% light and earnings down 25% YoY drops fresh evidence into the bear's lap. That is a textbook narrative-confirming event for a fragile story. Analyst tone is being pulled toward the miss headline rather than the deep-value framing. Macro cross-currents add mild pressure: 10y at 4.63%, market PE 26.2, and capital-intensive gaming operators with Asia exposure are not what a stretched-multiple tape wants to own. Beta under 1 mutes the market push both ways, so the dominant force here is name-specific narrative pressure, not the macro tape. Net: a genuine, ordinary-to-moderate headwind, not a crash setup.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- Analyst target revisions in the 1-2 weeks post-miss - are cuts broad or isolated
- Macao monthly GGR prints and any Beijing policy signals on gaming/travel
- Whether the stock holds recent lows or breaks trend, which would validate momentum turning
- High-roller / VIP segment commentary from peers (MGM, WYNN, MLCO) confirming or refuting structural decline
The world's read is that Macao is a mature, policy-managed mid-single-digit market and that LVS is a levered asset play in a geopolitically awkward jurisdiction — hence a price that mathematically assumes only 4.4% growth. The structure beneath that story is different: LVS is the largest room and MICE owner in Cotai just as the market's economics shifted from junket credit to mass/premium-mass footfall, which rewards exactly the physical assets it already owns and cannot be replicated quickly. Singapore adds a legally protected duopoly with no new supply. Macro headwinds (10y 4.63, curve 0.48) matter for the balance sheet and capex funding, not for the demand line. The honest tension: the growth is real but its rate is decaying toward category levels as the Londoner/MBS renovation comps lap, and the cash it produces is being reinvested under concession obligation rather than harvested. So the business direction is up; the slope flattens.
When we made this prediction on Aug 18, 2026, LVS was $45.43. We expect it to be $53.50 by Feb 2027, and we consider it great value under $40.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 18, 2026.
Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.