CTS Eventim KGaA holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across profitability and valuation. TKO still leads on growth and stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, TKO carries the stronger setup — intact trend against CTS Eventim KGaA's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with CTS Eventim KGaA, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Most of the visible separation comes from profitability. The overall score gap is 23 points in favour of CTS Eventim AG & Co. KGaA.
Both operate in: Entertainment
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. EVD.DE and TKO share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how CTS Eventim KGaA and TKO each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
Score differences across key dimensions.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
CTS Eventim AG & Co. KGaA and TKO Group Holdings, Inc. look relatively close on structure, but the price setup still leans toward CTS Eventim AG & Co. KGaA.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The profitability lead is mainly driven by a 12.2-point operating margin advantage.
Stability still leans toward TKO Group Holdings, Inc., so the lead is real without reading as one-way.
The lead is built on both profitability and valuation — though growth still provides a counterweight.
Break down the EVD.DE vs TKO comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how EVD.DE and TKO each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.