Koi Pond

About Koi Pond

According to Multiples.VC, the average enterprise multiple (EV/EBITDA) of top US-listed gaming companies is currently 10x. Data from New York University last updated in January pegged the overall market average at 23.9x and 19.7x among EBITDA-positive firms, suggesting the sector is undervalued relative to other industries. In a report released Monday, Fitch Ratings said most North American gaming companies hold “Stable” outlooks with “adequate rating headroom” despite consumer headwinds.

Macquarie’s Beynon agrees with that sentiment, pointing to the relative stability of gaming companies through tough economic stretches such as the Covid-19 pandemic. Bankruptcies in the sector have been low relative to the broader market, he notes, and both land-based and digital companies have reason for optimism moving forward.

“It’s certainly not lost on us that this sector has underperformed for several years in a row just because it doesn’t have either the growth of say, tech companies, or the perceived free cash flow-insulated businesses, which we believe it does…We’ve thought there’s been value in the sector for a few years, particularly this year,” he told iGB.

What is Koi Pond?

The strategy is less about rapid growth and more about showing that a cash-generating business with falling debt and improving operations is undervalued.

By looking at four major gambling companies – Entain, Flutter, DraftKings and MGM Resorts International – it becomes clear why the sector should not be treated as a single trade.

Flutter has arguably the strongest online franchise of the four. Its share price fell from $282.33 on 18 September 2025, to $89.56 on 18 September this year, with a market valuation of $15.54 billion.

How to play Koi Pond

This sense of understanding was also described as something that needed to be maintained continuously, rather than achieved only once and then relied upon. 

Consumers reiterated that being informed is an ongoing process, and that fast-paced and immersive gambling formats can rapidly erode awareness.

On the question of who should be responsible for maintaining this understanding, participants favoured a shared model rather than placing the burden solely on one party.