Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to CBRE Group, Inc.
How CBRE Group, Inc. stacks up
CBRE · against 14 other Real Estate companies of similar size
Growth
74/ 100
Above the middle of the pack.
Ranked #5 of 15 · scores higher than 71% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score3 peers with a growth score of 70–79, including CBRE · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 74?
Weighted metrics compared with all Real Estate companies.Mainly thanks to its revenue growth, 3-year revenue growth and earnings per share growth, which are stronger than most Real Estate peers.
- faster growth in earnings per share: stronger than 62% of peers. Earnings per share growth: 22.6% vs peer median 11.2%
- faster revenue growth over three years: stronger than 78% of peers. 3-year revenue growth: 12.3% vs peer median 3.8%
- faster revenue growth over the last year: stronger than 79% of peers. Revenue growth: 14.9% vs peer median 3.0%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = CBRE, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | CBRE | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 15 reported | 14.9% | 4.4% | 71% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 14 reported | 22.6% | 10.4% | 77% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 15 reported | 12.3% | 9.6% | 71% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around CBRE| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 34.7B USD | 98 | 45 | |
| 2 | 56.1B AUD (≈$37.0B) | 81 | 70 | |
| 3 | 44.6B USD | 78 | 39 | |
| 4 | 54.4B USD | 77 | 57 | |
| 5 | 39.2B USD | 74 | 56 | |
| 6 | 34.5B USD | 67 | 51 | |
| 7 | 68.1B USD | 55 | 33 | |
| 8 | 4.28T JPY (≈$29.1B) | 54 | 47 | |
| 9 | 37.8B USD | 53 | 45 |
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