Texas Capital Downgrades Melco Resorts, Lowers 2026 EBITDA and Macau GGR View
Brokerage cuts rating to hold after trimming third‑ and fourth‑quarter EBITDA and October GGR forecast.

Key Takeaways
- Texas Capital cut Melco Resorts & Entertainment Ltd to a “hold” from “buy” on Friday due to weaker Macau GGR visibility and competition.
- The brokerage forecasts adjusted EBITDA of US$261.2m in Q3 2026 and US$280.6m in Q4 2026, with full‑year 2026 EBITDA at US$1.27bn.
- Texas Capital lowered its October Macau GGR forecast to a 4 percent year‑on‑year decline and noted September had the lowest daily average GGR since January 2025.
- The report cited China macro pressures and a July 2026 20 percent tax on assets in offshore trusts as potential drags on gaming demand.
Texas Capital Securities downgraded Melco Resorts & Entertainment Ltd to a “hold” rating from “buy” and pushed down near‑term earnings forecasts in a report issued on Friday, citing weaker visibility on Macau gross gaming revenue (GGR) and intensified competition for premium‑mass players. Analyst David Bain said the brokerage’s adjusted EBITDA estimates for Melco Resorts in Q3 and Q4 2026 were “significantly” below market consensus.
Downgrade and revised forecasts
Texas Capital now forecasts Melco Resorts’ adjusted EBITDA at US$261.2 million for the third quarter of 2026 and US$280.6 million for the final three months of 2026. For full‑year 2026, the brokerage expects adjusted EBITDA of US$1.27 billion, down 11 percent year‑on‑year, on net revenue of nearly US$4.90 billion, a decline of 5 percent.
The firm said its adjusted EBITDA estimates for the two quarters were 14 percent and 12 percent below consensus, respectively. The downgrade to “hold” reflected the combination of lower earnings visibility and heightened promotional competition in Macau.
Macau GGR outlook and recent indicators
Texas Capital revised its October Macau GGR forecast to a 4 percent year‑on‑year decline, down from a previous expectation of flat performance. The brokerage drew attention to September 2026, noting Macau’s daily average GGR in that month was the lowest since January 2025, and that industry checks in mid‑October did not show meaningful year‑on‑year improvement in demand.
The report also flagged that the fourth quarter of 2026 faces a tough comparison after Macau GGR recorded 15 percent year‑on‑year growth in the same period of 2025. UBS was cited for describing analysts’ consensus on October Macau GGR as “challenging”.
Drivers cited: China macro, tax changes and promotional competition
Mr Bain wrote that China macro factors — "prolonged deflationary pressures, sticky property market weakness and lower employment" — have affected gaming demand in Macau. He also noted checks citing a potential GGR impact from China’s July 2026 20 percent tax on assets in offshore trusts, which has prompted restructuring and some capital liquidation.
The brokerage highlighted sustained promotional competition among Macau’s six casino concessionaires, especially in the premium‑mass segment where operators have increased player reinvestment after the decline of the traditional junket system. Industry checks indicated another concessionaire had recently boosted promotional spending, reducing the brokerage’s confidence that such competition will ease over coming quarters.
Longer‑term view on Melco and assets
Despite the downgrade, Texas Capital maintained a constructive longer‑term view of Melco Resorts’ management, casino products and strategy. Mr Bain said he expected Melco to gain Macau market share in 2027, supported by enhancements to its properties.
Melco Resorts operates City of Dreams, Studio City and Altira Macau and runs Mocha Clubs electronic gaming machine venues in Macau. Its non‑Macau operations include City of Dreams Manila in the Philippines, City of Dreams Mediterranean in Cyprus, and gaming operations at City of Dreams Sri Lanka.
"We believe heightened player reinvestment levels are not permanent and give way to a longer‑term trend of competition based on product and service, benefiting Melco Resorts," Mr Bain wrote.
For further market context see the news section for recent Macau GGR reporting.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did Texas Capital downgrade Melco Resorts?
Texas Capital downgraded Melco Resorts to “hold” because of weaker visibility on Macau GGR and heightened competition for premium‑mass players. The firm said its adjusted EBITDA estimates for Q3 and Q4 2026 were significantly below market consensus and cited promotional spending among concessionaires as a factor.
What EBITDA and revenue does Texas Capital forecast for Melco in 2026?
Texas Capital forecasts adjusted EBITDA of US$1.27 billion for full‑year 2026, down 11 percent year‑on‑year, and net revenue of nearly US$4.90 billion, a 5 percent decline. The brokerage projects US$261.2m in adjusted EBITDA for Q3 2026 and US$280.6m for Q4 2026.
How has Texas Capital revised its Macau GGR outlook for October 2026?
The brokerage revised its October Macau GGR forecast to a 4 percent year‑on‑year decline, down from a prior view of flat performance. The note referenced September 2026 as having the lowest daily average GGR since January 2025 and mid‑October industry checks that showed no meaningful year‑on‑year demand improvement.
What longer‑term view did Texas Capital give on Melco’s prospects?
Texas Capital retained a positive longer‑term assessment of Melco’s management, casino products and strategy, and said it expects Melco to gain Macau market share in 2027 supported by property enhancements. The brokerage nevertheless lowered near‑term earnings expectations.
Tags
About the author

Oliver Grant
Industry Technology Correspondent
Oliver Grant covers the technology and business machinery of iGaming — platform and data deals, AI and compliance tooling, affiliate and marketing shifts, and the quarterly numbers behind them. The reports lead with the announcement, name the vendors and figures exactly as published, and separate genuine capability from press-release promise. When a supplier ships a new engine or a regulator tightens ad rules, Oliver Grant explains what actually changes for the companies involved.
More from Oliver Grant








