Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. (PK): what the price assumes

In the published model solve dated 2026-Q2, anchored at $14.93, Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. (PK) is priced for +8.8% growth. boothcheck publishes no house fair value, target price, or buy/sell rating; individual model outputs and user-controlled scenarios are analytical inputs, not Boothcheck targets. Narrative composed 2026-06-27.

Generated: 2026-08-10 · Exported: 2026-08-12 · Source: https://boothcheck.com/report/PK

Headline

FieldValue
TickerPK
CompanyPark Hotels & Resorts Inc.
Current price$14.93/sh
CompositionRooms 59% / Food and beverage 27% / Ancillary hotel 10% / Other 4%

What The Price Assumes (Inversion)

The assumption today's price embeds, recovered by inverting the valuation.

FieldValue
Inversion basiswhole-company
Operating margin (value-band context)4.4%
Operating margin (mid-cycle)13.0%
Margin compression (value-band)-8.6pp
Trailing margin (depressed year)0.9%
Implied growth8.8%
Multiple paid20x mid-cycle operating income

The operating-margin figure is value-band context at year 12: derived from the framework's value band, a separate calculation — not part of the priced-in solve.

Solve inputs: computed at a 8.1% cost of capital with 4% terminal growth over a 5-year stage; each 1pp of cost of capital moves the implied operating-profit growth ~7.3pp.

Reconcile: at the x-ray's 9.3% required return this reads ~17%/yr; the models below use their own rates.

How unusual the bet is: within-range (limited comparison data)

ReferenceValue
vs own history+0.67σ
implied end-window share0%

Valuation X-Ray

The price is supported by asset-based value, while growth-DCF lands below the price. A value/asset-supported name, not a pure growth bet.

How the valuation models price the stock relative to the market price. Price/FV above 1.0 means the market pays more than that lens defends (expensive); at or below 1.0 the lens can defend the price.

FamilyMedian price/FVModelsReads
Asset1.06x3expensive
Earnings0
Relative0
Growth2.58x1expensive

Families that justify the price: Asset Families that call it expensive: Growth

The models below discount at their own flat-beta convention rates (cost of equity 9.3%, WACC 4.7%); the inversion above states its own rate.

Per-Model Detail (n=4)

ModelFamilyFVPrice/FVApplicableMethodology
DCF Perpetual GrowthGrowth$0.00noFCF base $0.1B, growth -2% (input: historical growth), terminal g 0.5%, WACC 4.7%, 5yr projection
DCF Exit MultipleGrowth$11.611.29xnoExit EV/EBITDA: 16.9x / 18.9x / 20.9x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull), 5yr
Relative ValuationRelativenoP/S fallback (negative EPS): Sector P/S 2.5x × TTM revenue — excluded from consensus
Simple DDMGrowth$5.792.58xyesDPS $1.00, g=-6.8% (sustainable: ROE (TTM) × retention; not the terminal-growth assumption), ke=9.3%
Two-Stage DDMGrowth$-0.32noStage 1: -136% for 5yr, Stage 2: 3.5% perpetual
Simple Excess ReturnAsset$15.720.95xyesReference only (book value floor): BV/sh $15.71, ROE negative
Two-Stage Excess ReturnAsset$14.141.06xyesReference only (book value with convergence): BV/sh $15.71, ROE converges to ke
Discounted Future Market CapGrowth$8.861.69xnoRev $2.5B, growth -2% (input: historical growth; tapered), Terminal P/S: 1.0x / 1.2x / 1.4x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull, cap 8x)
Peter Lynch Fair ValueRelative$0.00noNegative/zero EPS — earnings-based value floored at $0
Margin TrajectoryGrowthno
Earnings Power ValueEarnings$2.565.83xnoNormalized EBIT (5y avg op income, one-time charges added back) $0.22B × (1−8%) / WACC 4.7% → EPV (no growth)
Residual IncomeAssetno
Graham NumberAssetno
EV/EBITDA RelativeRelativenoEBITDA $0.35B × sector EV/EBITDA 12.0x
FCF YieldEarnings$0.011493.00xyesFCF $69.0M / Kₑ 9.3% — zero-growth perpetuity (excluded from median)
SBC-Adj FCF YieldEarnings$0.011493.00xyesSBC-adj FCF $0.05B (FCF $0.07B − SBC $0.02B) capitalized at Kₑ (excluded from median)
Ben Graham FormulaEarningsno
ROIC-Justified P/BAsset$2.785.37xyesBV $15.71 × (ROIC 0.8% / WACC 4.7%)
P/Sales SectorRelativenoRevenue $2.53B × sector P/S 2.5x
PEG Fair ValueRelativeno
Earnings YieldEarningsno
Funds From Operations MultipleRelativeno
Clinical Phase NPVGrowthno
MertonAssetno
V5 Mechanicalno

Economic-Unit Decomposition (Sum Of The Parts)

One or more material disclosed units has unresolved economics. Unknown/general is not evidence of homogeneity: segment SOTP is primary but incomplete, consolidated cash flow may remain only a secondary cross-check when every unit shares an enterprise basis, and one sector multiple or target margin is withheld.

UnitRoleValuation basisRevenueReported profitValue evidenceStatus
Core Hotelsoperatingenterprise$2.0bwithheldunresolved no unit value
Non-Core Hotelsoperatingenterprise$443.0mwithheldunresolved no unit value

No total common-equity value is stated. One or more material units lack a supported unit value. The displayed values are an indicative subtotal; consolidated debt and cash cannot be applied to a fraction of the company.

Solvency

FieldValue
Net debt$3.7b
Net debt / NOPAT (after-tax)12.16x
Net debt / operating income (pre-tax)11.23x
Interest coverage1.6x
Share count CAGR (buyback)-4.0%
Burning cashno

Leverage and coverage are computed on normalized mid-cycle operating income (mid-cycle margin 13.0%); the trailing year was depressed.

Bullet Takeaways

Bull Case

Read Park through its balance sheet and capital plan, because that is where management is telling you how it sees the business. The company carries roughly $3.7B of net debt, but it ended Q1 2026 with about $2 billion of total liquidity: $156M of cash plus roughly $1.8B of available capacity. That cushion exists because management has been deliberately recycling capital, divesting non-core hotels and using the proceeds to cut leverage and reinvest in the core portfolio. The 10-K states the strategy plainly: divest non-core hotels to enhance portfolio quality and long-term growth, while using sale proceeds to reduce leverage, reinvest in the core, and increase shareholder value. A management team that is actively selling assets to delever and still funding renovations is signaling confidence that the core portfolio is worth more than the market's near-book quote.

The operations underneath support that confidence. Q1 2026 beat, with comparable hotel RevPAR up 5.5% year over year (excluding the Royal Palm property under renovation since May 2025), resort RevPAR up 7.6% on leisure strength, hotel adjusted EBITDA of $152M at roughly a 26% margin, and AFFO guidance raised by a cent to a $1.74 to $1.90 range with full-year RevPAR guidance lifted 50 basis points. The renovations are themselves a forward lever: management is investing in Hawaii and other core assets specifically to drive future earnings growth. A lodging portfolio posting mid-single-digit RevPAR gains and raising its cash-flow guidance is not a broken business, it is a leveraged one in a recovering demand environment.

The valuation math is the clearest part of the bull case. The price trades essentially at book value, about $15 (June 27, 2026).71 per share, and the asset family is the only frame that reaches it, which makes sense for a hotel REIT whose value is the real estate. The inverted price implies about 8.6% company-wide operating growth, which the engine flags as within the range Park has recently delivered, so the stretch is duration rather than rate. With trailing operating income depressed by the cycle and by renovation disruption, the earnings-based models read the price as expensive, but those are exactly the models that mis-fit an asset-heavy, FFO-driven business. If the asset sales close at reasonable values and the refinancings clear, the equity is being offered at the value of the underlying hotels with the recovery as optionality.

Bear Case

The structural truth a holder must face is that Park is cheap because of what is deteriorating around the equity, not in spite of it: the price sits near book because the balance sheet is stretched and a maturity wall is bearing down. Net debt is roughly $3.7B against only $156M of cash, and trailing operating income of about $22M does not begin to cover the debt service, with interest coverage near 0.1x on the EDGAR trailing read. The firm trips three distress signals (sustained net losses, negative retained earnings, and an Altman distress reading), and while those partly reflect REIT depreciation accounting, the leverage is real. When the asset family is the only valuation frame that supports the price and the earnings frames all say expensive, the equity is a thin sliver on top of a large, fixed claim, which is precisely the configuration that punishes a holder if asset values slip.

The near-term pressure point is refinancing. The 10-K discloses about $1.4 billion of mortgage loans maturing, with the company intending to draw on its 2025 Delayed Draw Term Loan to help repay them, and the largest piece is the $1.275 billion CMBS on the Hilton Hawaiian Village, the company's biggest asset at 2,886 rooms, due in early November 2026. The plan is to combine the term-loan draw with a new mortgage on the Bonnet Creek complex to retire that CMBS. That is a coherent plan, but it is a plan that depends on the financing markets staying open and on lenders valuing the collateral favorably, and the Hawaiian Village posted only 0.9% RevPAR growth, the softest in the portfolio, right as it needs to be financed. Refinancing risk on a single asset of this size is a concentrated, externally controlled variable the near-book price does not fully discount.

The disposition program carries its own friction. As of late April 2026 the non-core initiative still had 12 hotels with 4,977 rooms to sell, nine identified for sale, plus three properties under Safehold ground leases where disposition timing is uncertain because of ongoing litigation. Selling hotels to delever works only if the bids arrive at acceptable prices, and a litigation-clouded ground-lease situation is exactly the kind of asset that trades at a discount or not at all. The 10-K is candid that economic conditions, reduced travel, lower consumer confidence, pandemics, and adverse politics can all lower hotel revenues and profitability. Layer that demand sensitivity on top of a refinancing wall and a half-finished asset-sale program, and the bear case is straightforward: the operations can be fine and the equity can still be the wrong place to sit if the capital structure does not resolve cleanly.

Valuation

Park is an asset story trading at an asset price, and the valuation has to be read that way. At about $15 the stock sits essentially at book value of $15.71 per share, and the asset family is the only one of the four that reaches the price: the two-stage excess-return reference and the book-value floor both land near the quote. The relative and growth families read the price as expensive, but that is a measurement artifact, because trailing operating income of roughly $22M is depressed by renovation disruption and the lodging cycle, and capitalizing a trough number understates a real-estate-heavy business. The inverted price implies about 8.6% company-wide operating growth over five years, solved at an 8.1% cost of capital, and the engine notes that pace is within Park's recent range, so the implied bet is on persistence rather than an unusual rate.

The model set is thin here by design. The projection-based methods, the perpetual-growth DCF, the discounted future market cap, and the earnings-power value, are gated off because three distress signals make those methods unreliable for a firm in this financial state, and the dividend models break on a negative sustainable growth rate. The ROIC-justified book multiple lands well below the price because reported ROIC is near zero, again a function of depreciation and a soft earnings window rather than the economic value of the hotels. The honest read is that GAAP earnings frames do not fit a leveraged hotel REIT, the right yardstick is the property value net of debt and the AFFO the portfolio generates, and the asset frame proxies that better than the earnings frames do.

The synthesis is that the equity is priced at the net asset value the market currently ascribes to the hotels, with essentially no premium for recovery and no discount beyond the leverage already visible. The number is therefore not a steady-state estimate but a function of whether the capital structure resolves, which is the correct way to value a near-book, highly levered REIT.

Catalysts

The catalysts cluster tightly around the back half of 2026 and the balance sheet. Park reported Q1 2026 on May 1, 2026, beating with $0.45 of EPS, hotel adjusted EBITDA of $152M, comparable RevPAR up 5.5% excluding the property under renovation, and it raised AFFO guidance by a cent to $1.74 to $1.90 and lifted full-year RevPAR guidance by 50 basis points to 0.5% to 2.5%. The operating trajectory is constructive, but the events that move the equity most are financing milestones. The company intends to draw on its delayed-draw term loan in June to repay the $121M Hyatt Regency Boston mortgage, then draw the remainder in September alongside a planned Bonnet Creek mortgage to retire the $1.275B Hilton Hawaiian Village CMBS maturing in early November. Each of those steps closing on schedule and at reasonable cost would de-risk the thesis materially; any slippage would amplify it.

The other live catalyst is the disposition program. Park sold the Hilton Seattle Airport Hotel and additional non-core assets for $31M in the quarter, and as of late April still had a dozen non-core hotels to sell, nine identified, plus three Safehold ground-lease properties whose timing is uncertain pending litigation. Asset-sale announcements at firm prices reduce leverage and validate the net-asset-value case, while a stalled program or weak bids would do the opposite. On sentiment, the sell side is cautious, with a Hold-leaning consensus across roughly 9 to 26 analysts and price targets clustered near $12 to $14, around or modestly below the current quote, reflecting the refinancing overhang. The variables to track are the November HHV refinancing, the pace and pricing of non-core sales, and RevPAR at the Hawaiian Village specifically, which grew just 0.9% and is the asset most central to both the cash flows and the financing.

Peer Cohorts (Per Segment, With Filing Citations)

Core Hotels / Non-Core Hotels (reported)

Methodology Note

Fundamentals sourced from SEC EDGAR filings. Current price from Databento. The priced-in inversion and valuation x-ray are computed by the boothcheck engine; narrative composed by AI from the structured data.

View the full interactive PK report on boothcheck