InterContinental Hotels leads structurally, with profitability as the clearest single gap between the two profiles. Rollins does not offset that deficit through any equally strong structural edge elsewhere. 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).
The comparison is mainly decided in profitability, with the rest of the profile carrying less weight. InterContinental Hotels Group PLC leads by 23 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 largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
InterContinental Hotels Group PLC still looks stronger, and the price setup does not materially undermine that lead.
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 6.2-point operating margin advantage.
Rollins, Inc. still looks less cycle-sensitive — that keeps the result from looking completely one-sided.
The main edge on profitability is clear, but the broader result still comes with a real counterweight.
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.