IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: Blank Capital Research ("BCR") is a technology platform, not a registered investment advisor or broker-dealer. The algorithmically generated signals, scores, and rankings provided on this site ("God Mode" Signals) are for informational and research purposes only and do not constitute financial advice, investment recommendations, or an offer to sell or solicit an offer to buy any securities.
HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS: The "timing scores" and "regime signals" displayed are based on quantitative models. Hypothetical or simulated performance results have certain inherent limitations. Unlike an actual performance record, simulated results do not represent actual trading. Also, since the trades have not actually been executed, the results may have under-or-over compensated for the impact, if any, of certain market factors, such as lack of liquidity.
RISK OF LOSS: Trading in financial markets involves a high degree of risk and may result in the loss of your entire investment. Data provided by third-party sources (Intrinio, Snowflake) is believed to be reliable but is not guaranteed for accuracy or completeness. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
© 2026 Blank Capital Research. All rights reserved. System Version: Aegis V8 (God Mode).
CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL INC vs Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. — Side-by-side quantitative comparison
Based on our 6-factor quantitative model, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (HLT) is the stronger stock with a composite score of 61.6/100 and a Hold rating, compared to CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL INC (CMG) at 50.5/100 (Hold). HLT ranks #546 in our universe versus #1935 for CMG, giving it an edge of 11.1 points across quality, value, momentum, investment, stability, and short interest factors.
For the Quality factor — which measures profitability and business quality through metrics like ROE, gross margins, and capital efficiency — CMG leads at 63/100, while HLT trails at 57/100 (CMG: 63/100, HLT: 57/100). The 6-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in quality characteristics between these stocks.
On the Value factor, which evaluates whether a stock is cheap or expensive relative to its earnings, book value, and cash flows, these stocks are closely matched (HLT: 50/100, CMG: 47/100). The narrow 3-point spread suggests similar value profiles, so this factor alone is unlikely to be a decisive differentiator.
For the Momentum factor — which captures price trends and institutional sentiment over the trailing 3-12 months — HLT leads at 72/100, while CMG trails at 39/100 (HLT: 72/100, CMG: 39/100). The 34-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in momentum characteristics between these stocks.
For the Investment factor — which assesses capital allocation quality including reinvestment rates and asset growth — CMG leads at 38/100, while HLT trails at 25/100 (CMG: 38/100, HLT: 25/100). The 13-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in investment characteristics between these stocks.
For the Stability factor — which measures financial health through leverage ratios and price volatility — HLT leads at 83/100, while CMG trails at 63/100 (HLT: 83/100, CMG: 63/100). The 20-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in stability characteristics between these stocks.
For the Short Interest factor — which tracks institutional bearish positioning and potential risk from elevated short selling — CMG leads at 78/100, while HLT trails at 71/100 (CMG: 78/100, HLT: 71/100). The 7-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in short interest characteristics between these stocks.
Based on our 6-factor model, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (HLT) is utilizing a stronger overall profile than CMG, with a Composite Score of 62 vs 51. HLT holds a moderate edge, particularly in Momentum and Stability, though both stocks have merits.
| Overall Rating | ||
| Composite Score | 62 | 51 |
| Rank | #546 | #1,935 |
| Stars | 3 / 5 | 3 / 5 |
| Action | Hold | Hold |
| Factor Scores | ||
| Quality | 57 | 63 |
| Value | 50 | 47 |
| Momentum | 72 | 39 |
| Stability | 83 | 63 |
| Investment | 25 | 38 |
| Short Interest | 71 | 78 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E Ratio | 36.23 | 34.38 |
| P/B Ratio | — | 16.31 |
| P/S Ratio | 4.89 | 4.37 |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.51 | 22.36 |
| Dividend Yield | 0.2% | 0.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| ROE | -46.1% | 42.6% |
| ROA | 9.5% | 16.4% |
| Gross Margin | 91.1% | 24.5% |
| Operating Margin | 24.9% | 15.9% |
| Net Margin | 13.5% | 12.7% |
| Growth & Risk | ||
| Revenue Growth | 8.8% | 7.5% |
| Debt/Equity | — | 0.00 |
| Beta | 0.91 | 0.94 |
| Market | ||
| Market Cap | $61.02B | $52.55B |
Based on our 6-factor quantitative model, HLT currently has the higher composite score (61.6/100, Hold) and ranks #546 in our universe. However, the "better" stock depends on your investment goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon. We recommend reviewing the full factor breakdown above before making a decision.
Our comparison analyzes six quantitative factors: Quality (profitability and business strength, 30% weight), Momentum (price trends, 25%), Value (valuation attractiveness, 15%), Investment (capital allocation, 10%), Stability (financial health, 10%), and Short Interest (institutional positioning, 10%). Each factor is scored 0-100 and combined into a composite score.
HLT has the higher value score at 50/100 compared to CMG at 47/100. A higher value score indicates the stock trades at a more attractive valuation relative to its earnings, book value, and cash flows.
Our stock rankings and comparisons are updated daily using the latest available market data, financial statements, and price information. Factor scores reflect the most recent quarterly filings and trailing price data.