InterContinental Hotels holds the cleaner structural position, with profitability as the main driver and valuation adding further support. Rollins still leads on growth and valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. On the market side, InterContinental Hotels is in better shape — its trend is intact while Rollins's trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — InterContinental Hotels's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Peer scores are normalised within each company's primary universe (IHG.L: STOXX 600, ROL: Russell 1000).
Profitability still does most of the heavy lifting in this comparison. InterContinental Hotels Group PLC leads by 10 points on the overall comparison score.
This comparison is anchored in long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
This level of similarity signals a strong structural match, even though some dimensions still separate the two companies.
The clearest structural overlap shows up in investment intensity and revenue growth trajectory.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The clearest separation appears in profitability.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
InterContinental Hotels Group PLC is stronger, but the price setup still looks more supportive for Rollins, Inc..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Where IHG.L and ROL each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.
Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.
The profitability lead is mainly driven by a 6.3-point operating margin advantage.
Rollins, Inc. still looks less cycle-sensitive — that keeps the result from looking completely one-sided.
The profitability lead is clear, but pricing and valuation still pull in the other direction — the result holds, but not without friction.
Break down the IHG.L vs ROL comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how IHG.L and ROL 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.
Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.
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.