MAR vs. HLT

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Marriott International, Inc. (MAR) and Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (HLT).

Performance

MAR vs. HLT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Marriott International, Inc. (MAR) and Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (HLT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

MAR vs. HLT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MAR Marriott International, Inc.	7.69%	12.31%	24.92%	53.06%	-9.34%	25.26%	-12.53%	41.49%	-19.05%	66.24%
HLT Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.	7.36%	16.49%	36.11%	44.68%	-18.72%	40.20%	0.47%	55.48%	-9.40%	829.98%

Fundamentals

Market Cap MAR : $89.83B HLT : $72.13B
EPS MAR : $9.56 HLT : $6.13
PE Ratio MAR : 34.89 HLT : 50.28
PEG Ratio MAR : 0.91 HLT : 0.81
PS Ratio MAR : 3.47 HLT : 6.09
Total Revenue (TTM) MAR : $26.19B HLT : $12.04B
Gross Profit (TTM) MAR : $5.59B HLT : $3.87B
EBITDA (TTM) MAR : $4.62B HLT : $2.28B

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MAR having a 7.69% return and HLT slightly lower at 7.36%. Over the past 10 years, MAR has underperformed HLT with an annualized return of 18.49%, while HLT has yielded a comparatively higher 46.67% annualized return.

MAR

• 1D: 1.95%
• 1M: 0.90%
• YTD: 7.69%
• 6M: 27.99%
• 1Y: 41.29%
• 3Y*: 27.42%
• 5Y*: 18.50%
• 10Y*: 18.49%

HLT

• 1D: 1.37%
• 1M: 1.14%
• YTD: 7.36%
• 6M: 20.19%
• 1Y: 35.93%
• 3Y*: 30.19%
• 5Y*: 20.75%
• 10Y*: 46.67%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

MAR vs. HLT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

MAR

MAR Risk / Return Rank: 82
MAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
MAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
MAR Omega Ratio Rank: 76
MAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
MAR Martin Ratio Rank: 85

HLT

HLT Risk / Return Rank: 81
HLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
HLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
HLT Omega Ratio Rank: 76
HLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
HLT Martin Ratio Rank: 85

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

MAR vs. HLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Marriott International, Inc. (MAR) and Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (HLT). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	MAR	HLT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	1.41	-0.01
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.18	2.09	+0.09
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.26	0.00
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.19	2.75	+0.44
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.84	7.94	-0.11
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MAR vs. HLT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAR Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is comparable to the HLT Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAR and HLT, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MAR	HLT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.40	1.41	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65	0.77	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.26	+0.31
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	0.23	+0.23

Correlation

The correlation between MAR and HLT is 0.81, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

MAR vs. HLT - Dividend Comparison

MAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, more than HLT's 0.19% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MAR Marriott International, Inc.	0.80%	0.85%	0.86%	0.87%	0.67%	0.00%	0.36%	1.22%	1.44%	0.95%	1.39%	1.42%
HLT Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.	0.19%	0.21%	0.24%	0.33%	0.36%	0.00%	0.13%	0.54%	0.84%	31.40%	1.03%	0.65%

Drawdowns

MAR vs. HLT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAR drawdown since its inception was -75.59%, which is greater than HLT's maximum drawdown of -50.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAR and HLT.

Drawdown Indicators

	MAR	HLT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.59%	-50.82%	-24.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.96%	-13.01%	+0.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.50%	-32.65%	+2.15%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.26%	-50.82%	-10.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.18%	-5.14%	-2.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.97%	-9.81%	-5.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.27%	4.50%	+0.77%

Volatility

MAR vs. HLT - Volatility Comparison

Marriott International, Inc. (MAR) and Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (HLT) have volatilities of 7.84% and 7.71%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MAR	HLT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.84%	7.71%	+0.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.75%	16.42%	+3.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.62%	25.63%	+3.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.79%	26.97%	+1.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.76%	180.95%	-148.19%

Financials

MAR vs. HLT - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Marriott International, Inc. and Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

MAR - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Marriott International, Inc. reported a gross profit of 1.11B and revenue of 6.69B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 16.5%.

HLT - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. reported a gross profit of 1.28B and revenue of 3.09B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 41.5%.

MAR - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Marriott International, Inc. reported an operating income of 777.00M and revenue of 6.69B, resulting in an operating margin of 11.6%.

HLT - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. reported an operating income of 602.00M and revenue of 3.09B, resulting in an operating margin of 19.5%.

MAR - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Marriott International, Inc. reported a net income of 445.00M and revenue of 6.69B, resulting in a net margin of 6.7%.

HLT - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. reported a net income of 297.00M and revenue of 3.09B, resulting in a net margin of 9.6%.