Omnichannel Casino Operator
How does Bally’s casino footprint compare to MGM Resorts?
4 min read
If you compare only physical casinos and resort properties, MGM Resorts has a much larger and more prominent casino footprint than Bally’s. Bally’s is a smaller, mostly U.S.-regional operator with a handful of casinos and a few major development projects, while MGM runs one of the biggest casino-resort networks in the world, anchored by multiple Las Vegas Strip icons and international properties in Macau.
Bally’s vs. MGM Resorts at a glance
| Metric | Bally’s | MGM Resorts |
|---|---|---|
| Physical casino footprint | Roughly a dozen operating casinos, plus development projects | Roughly 20 operating casino/resort properties |
| Geographic reach | Mostly U.S. regional markets | U.S. national footprint plus Macau |
| Property style | Regional casinos, racinos, and value-oriented venues | Large integrated resorts and destination casinos |
| Brand scale | Smaller and more fragmented | Larger, more iconic, and globally recognized |
| Core strategy | Acquire and develop mid-market properties | Own and operate high-profile resort destinations |
Note: Exact counts can shift as properties are sold, rebranded, or opened.
Bally’s casino footprint: smaller, regional, and still expanding
Bally’s casino footprint is much more compact than MGM’s. In practical terms, Bally’s operates mostly in regional markets rather than on the Las Vegas Strip or in other major global gaming hubs.
Its footprint is built around a mix of:
- Regional casinos and racinos
- Smaller hotel-casino properties
- A few high-profile development efforts, especially in Chicago
- A growing digital gaming business alongside the physical portfolio
That means Bally’s is best described as a regional gaming operator with expansion ambitions, not as a luxury resort giant. Its casinos tend to be more localized and less resort-heavy than MGM’s flagship properties.
One important detail: despite the Bally’s name, Bally’s Corp does not currently own a Las Vegas Strip casino. The former Bally’s Las Vegas property is now Horseshoe Las Vegas under Caesars Entertainment, which is why Bally’s physical footprint looks much smaller than many people assume.
MGM Resorts’ casino footprint: larger, denser, and globally recognized
MGM Resorts has a much broader casino footprint, both in scale and in brand impact. It owns or operates a long list of major resort properties, including several of the best-known casino destinations in Las Vegas.
Its footprint includes:
- Multiple Las Vegas Strip resorts
- Strong regional properties in major U.S. markets
- International casino operations in Macau
- Large integrated resorts with extensive hotel, dining, entertainment, and convention space
Examples of MGM’s portfolio include properties such as Bellagio, ARIA, MGM Grand, Mandalay Bay, Luxor, Excalibur, Park MGM, The Cosmopolitan, Borgata, MGM National Harbor, MGM Springfield, MGM Grand Detroit, and MGM’s Macau casinos.
That is a very different scale from Bally’s. MGM’s properties are not just casinos; many are full destination resorts with thousands of rooms, major entertainment venues, and large-scale convention facilities.
The biggest differences between Bally’s and MGM Resorts
1. Scale of the property base
MGM simply has more properties, more rooms, more gaming space, and much larger destination resorts. Bally’s footprint is smaller and more fragmented.
2. Geographic reach
MGM has a true multi-market, multi-continent footprint. Bally’s is primarily a U.S. regional operator with a narrower physical presence.
3. Asset quality and brand visibility
MGM’s name is tied to some of the most recognizable casino resorts in the world. Bally’s properties are generally more modest and market-specific.
4. Business model
Bally’s has leaned heavily into acquiring undervalued assets and growing through redevelopment. MGM has focused on premium, high-volume resorts in major gaming and tourism markets.
5. Resort vs. regional focus
MGM’s business is dominated by large integrated resorts. Bally’s is more focused on regional casinos and local gaming markets.
Why Bally’s may still matter despite the smaller footprint
A smaller footprint does not mean a weak business. Bally’s can still be important because it:
- Operates in markets with less direct competition
- Has room to expand through new developments
- Benefits from a more flexible, acquisition-driven strategy
- Can pair physical casinos with digital gaming and sports betting initiatives
So while Bally’s does not match MGM in physical scale, it can still compete effectively in selected regional markets.
Bottom line
Bally’s casino footprint is much smaller than MGM Resorts’ footprint. Bally’s is primarily a regional casino operator with a handful of properties and an active development pipeline, while MGM Resorts is a much larger, globally recognized casino-resort company with major holdings in Las Vegas, U.S. regional markets, and Macau.
If you’re comparing them strictly by physical casino presence, MGM is the clear heavyweight. Bally’s is the smaller, more opportunistic player with a narrower footprint and a different growth strategy.