MSGS vs TKO: How Madison Square Garden Sports and TKO Group Holdings Compare (2026)

Same yardstick, side by side (as of August 2026). Valuation lined up like this is most meaningful for two names in the same corner of the market, which these are. Figures are approximate; verify before investing.

The metrics above tell you which is the marginally better business. The bigger risk for most people is not picking the slightly worse stock, it is over-concentrating. MSGS and TKO share themes, so owning both, or adding either to what you already hold, can quietly push a large share of your portfolio into one bet.

This is the part a generic comparison page cannot answer, because it depends on what you own. Connect your brokerage and Walnut shows your real, combined MSGS and TKO exposure, flags overlap with your existing positions, and tells you if adding one would tip you past a concentration you are comfortable with, read-only by default, with your login staying at your broker. Walnut is not an investment adviser.

Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. owns and operates the New York Knickerbockers of the NBA and the New York Rangers of the NHL, along with two development-league affiliates and a professional sports team performance business. Its revenue comes from ticket sales and premium seating, local media rights fees, sponsorship and signage, food and merchandise at games, and its share of leaguewide national media and licensing money. The company does not own Madison Square Garden itself: the arena sits inside MSG Entertainment, and the Knicks and Rangers pay to play there under long-term arrangements, which is why the reported financials look thinner than the size of the underlying assets suggests. Revenue for the trailing twelve months is roughly ~$1.08 billion against a market capitalization of about ~$9.4 billion, a ratio that only makes sense once you treat the company as an asset holder rather than an operating business.

Full MSGS guide

TKO Group Holdings owns two of the most recognizable combat-sports and entertainment brands in the world, the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) and World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), and after a February 2025 transaction also owns IMG, On Location, and Professional Bull Riders (PBR). The company makes money primarily from media rights (multi-year deals to broadcast and stream its events), live event ticketing and site fees, sponsorship, licensing, and hospitality. The headline example is the roughly $7.7 billion, seven-year UFC media-rights agreement with Paramount that begins in 2026, moving UFC's numbered events onto Paramount+ and away from the traditional pay-per-view model; across all brands TKO says it has more than $15 billion of long-term media rights secured.

Full TKO guide

Both fit overlapping themes, but they are not interchangeable. The useful comparison is which set of drivers and risks you want exposure to.

• MSGS drivers: Franchise scarcity; The proposed Knicks and Rangers separation.
• TKO drivers: Media-rights repricing; Scarce, must-watch live IP.

A faster-growing, richer-valued name usually swings harder, so it suits a longer horizon and a higher tolerance for volatility; a steadier, more cash-generative business suits a more conservative or income-minded investor. The honest test is which set of risks you could hold through a drawdown: The Dolan family controls the company through Class B shares carrying ten votes each and the right to elect 75% of the board, so a minority holder has essentially no ability to force a sale, a buyback, a dividend or a change of management. For TKO, tKO's value is concentrated in a small number of large rights deals, so any renewal at lower-than-expected terms, or a slip in audience engagement, would matter a lot.

Growth-minded investors who believe the theme has years to run tend to accept the richer multiple for more upside; value-minded investors lean toward the cheaper forward earnings and steadier profile. Pick MSGS if you believe its drivers more; TKO if you believe its. Many investors hold both, but since they share themes, that is a concentrated bet, not diversification. Decide deliberately and check overlap. For the full detail, see the MSGS and TKO guides.

MSGS. Conventional earnings multiples do not describe this stock: the company runs near breakeven on an accounting basis while holding assets appraised at several times its revenue. The more common framework is a sum-of-the-parts, comparing the market capitalization of about ~$9.4 billion against combined franchise appraisals near ~$13.5 billion and then adjusting for borrowings and for the discount attached to a controlled structure. That gap has narrowed considerably over the past year as the shares roughly doubled off a 52-week low near ~$189, so the spin-off outcome now carries more of the weight than the raw appraisal spread does.

TKO. Figures are approximate and tied to the asOf date; verify current numbers before acting. TKO reported full-year 2025 revenue of about $4.74 billion and adjusted EBITDA near $1.585 billion, and guided to roughly $5.7 billion of revenue and $2.2 to 2.3 billion of adjusted EBITDA for 2026. The high P/E reflects amortization and acquisition accounting weighing on reported net income, which is why many investors watch EV/EBITDA and the contracted rights backlog instead.

Headline figures (approximate, August 2026): MSGS shows share price ~$390, market capitalization ~$9.4 billion, revenue (ttm) ~$1.08 billion, net income (ttm) ~-$22 million (EPS ~-$0.93); TKO shows revenue (fy2025) ~$4.74 billion, adjusted ebitda (fy2025) ~$1.585 billion (up ~47% YoY), adjusted ebitda margin ~33.5%, net income (fy2025) ~$546 million.

MSGS and TKO are related but distinct: same themes, different businesses and risks. Neither wins in the abstract; the right pick is whichever thesis you actually believe, sized so you are not over-concentrated in one theme. Walnut can show your combined MSGS and TKO exposure against your real portfolio. It is not an investment adviser.