What Moves Like HLT
Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. Hotels & Motels · NYSE
The tradable tickers whose daily moves track HLT most closely over the past year, filtered to risk comparable with HLT's own.
Closest match
MAR Marriott International — 0.820 correlation over the past year, and 16% choppier than HLT.
About HLT
As filed with the SEC twelve months to 2025-12-31 · balance sheet 2026-03-31
Congress trading 8 disclosed trades by 6 members · latest 2026-06-15 Filings on EDGAR CIK 1585689
| Ticker | 1-year correlation | 3-year | Volatility vs HLT | Risk | What it is |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAR Marriott International | 0.851 | 1.16× | 16% choppier | Hotels & Motels | |
| H Hyatt Hotels Corporation Class A | 0.778 | 1.44× | 44% choppier | Hotels & Motels | |
| IHG Intercontinental Hotels Group American Preferred | 0.699 | 1.07× | similar | Hotels & Motels | |
| RSPD Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Discretionary ETF | 0.696 | 0.79× | 21% calmer | Fund | |
| TNL Travel Leisure Co. | 0.655 | 1.52× | 52% choppier | Hotels & Motels | |
| RHP Ryman Hospitality Properties, Inc. (REIT) | 0.617 | 1.01× | similar | Real Estate Investment Trusts | |
| APLE Apple Hospitality REIT, Inc. | 0.606 | 0.94× | similar | Real Estate Investment Trusts | |
| WH Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. | 0.630 | 1.30× | 30% choppier | Hotels & Motels | |
| PEJ Invesco Leisure and Entertainment ETF | 0.708 | 0.80× | 20% calmer | Fund | |
| PK Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. | 0.597 | 1.29× | 29% choppier | Hotels & Motels | |
| HST Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. | 0.624 | 1.04× | similar | Real Estate Investment Trusts | |
| DRH Diamondrock Hospitality Company | 0.594 | 1.10× | similar | Real Estate Investment Trusts | |
| XHR Xenia Hotels & Resorts, Inc. | 0.600 | 1.17× | 17% choppier | Hotels & Motels | |
| JETS U.S. Global Jets ETF | 0.596 | 1.37× | 37% choppier | Fund | |
| XHB State Street SPDR S&P Homebuilders ETF | 0.515 | 1.18× | 18% choppier | Fund | |
| SPGP Invesco S&P 500 GARP ETF | 0.625 | 0.66× | 34% calmer | Fund | |
| FTXR First Trust Nasdaq Transportation ETF | 0.619 | 0.90× | similar | Fund | |
| RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF | 0.626 | 0.67× | 33% calmer | Fund | |
| RLJ RLJ Lodging Trust Common Shares of Beneficial Interest $0.01 par value | 0.562 | 1.20× | 20% choppier | Real Estate Investment Trusts | |
| ITB iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF | 0.464 | 1.24× | 24% choppier | Fund | |
| VBR Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap Value ETF | 0.617 | 0.61× | 39% calmer | Fund | |
| PEB Pebblebrook Hotel Trust Common Shares of Beneficial Interest | 0.559 | 1.37× | 37% choppier | Real Estate Investment Trusts | |
| LOW Lowe's Companies, Inc. | 0.446 | 1.14× | 14% choppier | Retail-Lumber & Other Building Materials Dealers | |
| FPAG FPA Global Equity ETF | 0.615 | 0.64× | 36% calmer | Fund | |
| CHH Choice Hotels International, Inc. | 0.535 | 1.60× | 60% choppier | Hotels & Motels |
Showing 25 of 30 tickers that qualified. Correlation is of daily returns; 1.000 would mean moving in lockstep, 0.000 no relationship at all.
What this is for
Three questions, one number behind all of them.
- Harvesting a loss without leaving the market. Sell a position at a loss to book it, and the wash-sale rule stops you claiming that loss if you buy back something substantially identical within 30 days. The usual move is to buy something that behaves similarly without being the same security. What counts as substantially identical is a question for a tax professional, not for a correlation table — but finding the candidates is what this page does.
- Picking between near-duplicates. A dozen funds track the same index. If two of them correlate at 0.999, the choice is about expense ratio, spread and tax treatment, not exposure.
- Finding out you hold one position twice. Two tickers that feel like separate holdings and correlate at 0.97 are one bet wearing two names. That is the most common way a portfolio ends up less diversified than its owner thinks.
How to read the two correlation columns
The one-year figure is what the relationship looks like now. The three-year figure is what it has looked like over a longer stretch. Comparing them is the point: when they agree, the relationship is structural and likely to hold. When the one-year number is far below the three-year one, something has changed — a shift in business mix, an index reconstitution, a sector that has stopped moving together — and the recent figure is the one to trust less, not more.
Correlation measures whether two things move together, not whether they move by the same amount. That is why the volatility column is there. Two tickers can correlate at 0.99 while one swings half again as hard, and swapping one for the other would quietly change how much risk you are carrying.
What was deliberately left out
Ranking purely by correlation produces answers that are mathematically perfect and practically useless. The closest matches to AAPL by raw correlation are leveraged AAPL funds at 0.999 — correct, and not replacements for anything. Four filters run before a ticker is allowed to appear:
- Comparable risk. A candidate has to sit within a band of the subject's own volatility. Note that the band is relative: looking up an ordinary stock or fund, this removes the leveraged products, because they move two or three times as far. Looking up a leveraged product itself, the comparable-risk answer is other leveraged products — and that is what you get.
- Three years of history. A replacement you intend to hold should have traded through more than one market regime. This removes the single-stock covered-call and option-income funds as a class, since almost all are recent launches.
- No structured products. What survives both of the above is the rare instrument that tracks another almost exactly but with visibly damped volatility — the signature of a capped-upside product. Genuine share-class pairs do not look like that, so they come through untouched.
- A liquidity floor. Everything listed trades at least $1.0M a day. A substitute you cannot get filled in is not a substitute.
Where all of that leaves a ticker with no close match, the page says so. A stock with no substitute is a real and useful finding, and inventing a loose one to fill the table would be worse than an empty answer.
Limits, stated up front
- Correlation is backward-looking. It describes the window it was measured over and carries no promise about the next one. Relationships that held for years break, usually at the moment people are relying on them.
- It says nothing about direction or returns. Two tickers can correlate at 0.99 and one can be down 40% over the same stretch. This page ranks co-movement, not performance, and nothing here is a recommendation.
- Daily returns only. Measured on a different frequency — weekly, monthly — the numbers move, sometimes a lot. Daily is the standard choice and it is the one used throughout.
- Substantially identical is a legal test, not a statistical one. A high correlation does not make two securities substantially identical for tax purposes, and a low one does not make them safe. Talk to a tax professional.
Where the numbers come from
Correlations are computed in-house from a daily price history and rebuilt every night. What gets published is the derived statistic — a correlation coefficient, a volatility ratio, an observation count — and nothing from which a price or return series could be reconstructed. The rest of the Markets section is on the Markets overview, including futures positioning extremes and SEC Form 4 insider transactions.