Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
ATO · against 358 other Utilities companies
Ranked #240 of 359 · scores higher than 33% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score36 peers with a valuation score of 30–39, including ATO · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly because of its EBITDA yield and free cash flow yield, which are weaker than most Utilities peers.
| Metric | ATO | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 356 reported | 4.8% | 5.0% | 48% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 359 reported | 6.7% | 8.6% | 26% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 164 reported | -6.9% | -1.8% | 26% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 341 reported | 52.0% | 64.7% | 36% | Context only |
| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2.8B BRL (≈$497M) | 100 | 69 | |
| 1 | 32.24T IDR (≈$2.0B) | 100 | 78 | |
| 3 | 55.0B HKD (≈$7.0B) | 99 | 63 | |
| 3 | 6.8B CNY (≈$945M) | 99 | 73 | |
| 3 | 1.1B EUR (≈$1.2B) | 99 | 76 | |
| 236 | Unavailable | 34 | 38 | |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score
| 236 |
| 3.0B USD |
| 34 |
| 44 |
| 240 | 17.9B CNY (≈$2.5B) | 33 | 41 |
| 240 | 20.0B CNY (≈$2.8B) | 33 | 43 |
| 240 | 29.4B USD | 33 | 57 |
| 243 | 726.0B JPY (≈$4.9B) | 32 | 15 |
| 243 | 93.3B USD | 32 | 50 |
| 243 | 6.8B THB (≈$191M) | 32 | 17 |
| 243 | 49.2B USD | 32 | 38 |