Which is better, LVS or RMS.PA?

On the Buffett-Fit framework, Hermès International Société en commandite par actions (RMS.PA) currently grades higher than LVS — 79/100 (B grade) vs 48/100 (D). That said, "better" depends on which framework you trust — LVS wins on Peter Lynch; RMS.PA wins on Warren Buffett, Benjamin Graham, Philip Fisher, Joel Greenblatt, Charlie Munger, and Terry Smith. The full pillar breakdown is on this page.

Should I buy LVS or RMS.PA?

This page is an educational comparison, not investment advice. Both LVS and RMS.PA are graded against the same Buffett 5-pillar framework (moat, earnings durability, management quality, financial health, valuation) plus six other documented investor frameworks. Read the side-by-side breakdown to see which one matches the criteria you care about most — and always do your own research before making any investment decision.

Is LVS better than RMS.PA for value investing?

On the Buffett-style value-investing framework, RMS.PA currently grades higher — 79/100 vs 48/100, a 31-point gap. The gap is driven by which pillars each stock passes; the table on this page shows moat, durability, management, financial health, and valuation side-by-side.

What's the difference between LVS and RMS.PA on Warren Buffett's framework?

Both stocks are evaluated on the same five pillars: economic moat (durable competitive advantage), earnings durability (consistent profitability), management quality (capital allocation), financial health (conservative balance sheet), and valuation (margin of safety). LVS currently scores 48/100 (D grade); RMS.PA scores 79/100 (B grade). The "Where each wins" section on this page breaks down which pillar each stock dominates.

Which has the stronger moat, LVS or RMS.PA?

Moat strength is one of the five pillars in the Buffett-Fit score on this page. LVS and RMS.PA are each scored on ROIC sustainability, gross-margin durability, and qualitative signals like brand strength, switching costs, network effects, and regulatory barriers. The pillar breakdown on this page shows the moat sub-score side-by-side so you can see which one has the more durable competitive advantage.

Which is more undervalued, LVS or RMS.PA?

Valuation is one of the five Buffett-Fit pillars on this page. Both stocks are scored on owner-earnings yield, price-to-intrinsic-value vs the underlying compounding rate, and the margin of safety relative to a conservative DCF. The valuation sub-score in the table below tells you which one currently trades at a more attractive price relative to its underlying business quality.

Are LVS and RMS.PA both Consumer Cyclical stocks?

Yes — both Las Vegas Sands Corp. (LVS) and Hermès International Société en commandite par actions (RMS.PA) operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector. That makes this a direct sector-peer comparison, which is the apples-to-apples way to use the Buffett-Fit framework: the score weighs each stock against its sector's specific quality and valuation benchmarks (sector-relative bonus), so the cross-stock comparison isn't distorted by inter-sector base-rate differences.

Is this LVS vs RMS.PA comparison investment advice?

No. This page is an educational pattern-match against documented public frameworks (Buffett, Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Greenblatt, Munger, Smith), not personalised investment advice. The scores reflect how closely each stock matches each framework's documented criteria — they are not buy/hold/sell recommendations. Always do your own research and consult a licensed financial adviser for personalised advice.

Stock comparison

Las Vegas Sands

LVS$31.14BConsumer Discretionary Market cap, Sector

Hermès International Société en commandite par actions

RMS.PA$171.88BConsumer Discretionary Market cap, Sector

Overall winner

Hermès International Société en commandite par actions

LVS 16 RMS.PA

Wins on the combined sum of fit scores across all four strategies. Per-strategy breakdown below.

Scored across Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt - plus a side-by-side metric table covering valuation, quality, growth and balance sheet.

Fit scores by strategy

LVS1wins

6winsRMS.PA

Warren Buffett

48D

B79

Benjamin Graham

59D

A90

Philip Fisher

54D

B84

Peter Lynch

98A

C69

Joel Greenblatt

39F

C61

Charlie Munger

57D

A86

Terry Smith

59D

A85

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	LVS	RMS.PA
Market cap	$31.14B	$171.88B Winner
P/E (TTM)	Winner: 18.5x	38.1x
EV/EBIT	Winner: 15.0x	23.8x
ROIC (TTM)	15.72%	24.18% Winner
Gross margin	49.59%	71.11% Winner
Net margin	13.41%	28.27% Winner
Revenue CAGR 5y	Winner: 32.42%	11.31%
EPS CAGR 5y	-	16.93%
Debt / Equity	13.1x	0.1x Winner
Dividend yield	2.16%	-

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

LVS leads on

Revenue CAGR 5y32.42%vs 11.31%+65%
P/E (TTM)18.5xvs 38.1x+51%
EV/EBIT15.0xvs 23.8x+37%

RMS.PA leads on

Debt / Equity0.1xvs 13.1x+99%
Market cap$171.88Bvs $31.14B+82%
Net margin28.27%vs 13.41%+53%
ROIC (TTM)24.18%vs 15.72%+35%

More like LVS

LVS vs GAW.L LVS vs GRGD.TO LVS vs WINA LVS vs 2059.TW

More like RMS.PA

RMS.PA vs GAW.L RMS.PA vs GRGD.TO RMS.PA vs WINA RMS.PA vs 2059.TW

Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for LVS Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for RMS.PA

Related on invest-like

Strongest Moat Highest ROIC Warren Buffett strategy Economic Moat

Key terms in this analysis

ROIC Free Cash Flow (FCF)Economic Moat P/E Ratio Margin of Safety Quality Score

Educational tool. Fit scores are deterministic projections from public financials onto each investor's published criteria - not personal recommendations or advice.

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	LVS	RMS.PA
Market cap	$31.14B	$171.88B Winner
P/E (TTM)	Winner: 18.5x	38.1x
EV/EBIT	Winner: 15.0x	23.8x
ROIC (TTM)	15.72%	24.18% Winner
Gross margin	49.59%	71.11% Winner
Net margin	13.41%	28.27% Winner
Revenue CAGR 5y	Winner: 32.42%	11.31%
EPS CAGR 5y	-	16.93%
Debt / Equity	13.1x	0.1x Winner
Dividend yield	2.16%	-

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

LVS leads on

Revenue CAGR 5y32.42%vs 11.31%+65%
P/E (TTM)18.5xvs 38.1x+51%
EV/EBIT15.0xvs 23.8x+37%

RMS.PA leads on

Debt / Equity0.1xvs 13.1x+99%
Market cap$171.88Bvs $31.14B+82%
Net margin28.27%vs 13.41%+53%
ROIC (TTM)24.18%vs 15.72%+35%