Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Charter Communications, Inc.
How Charter Communications, Inc. stacks up
CHTR · against 470 other Communication Services companies
Valuation
92/ 100
Near the top of its peers.
Ranked #37 of 471 · scores higher than 92% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score50 peers with a valuation score of 90–100, including CHTR · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 92?
Weighted metrics compared with all Communication Services companies.Mainly thanks to its earnings yield, free cash flow yield and EBITDA yield, which are stronger than most Communication Services peers.
- more operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: stronger than 81% of peers. EBITDA yield: 19.8% vs peer median 8.6%
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 92% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 31.6% vs peer median 7.4%
- higher earnings for the price paid: stronger than 99% of peers. Earnings yield: 35.7% vs peer median 2.9%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = CHTR, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | CHTR | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 461 reported | 33.8% | 3.0% | 99% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 493 reported | 19.0% | 8.7% | 81% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 227 reported | 29.5% | 7.6% | 92% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 467 reported | 124.9% | 48.9% | 79% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around CHTR| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 105.8B KRW (≈$76M) | 100 | 80 | |
| 1 | 694.0B KRW (≈$500M) | 100 | 66 | |
| 3 | 2.6B HKD (≈$329M) | 99 | 80 | |
| 3 | 3.1B HKD (≈$398M) | 99 | 74 | |
| 3 | 226M SEK (≈$23M) | 99 | 63 | |
| 32 | 289.2B IDR (≈$18M) | 93 | 47 | |
| 32 |
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