Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.
How Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. stacks up
CRL · against 1,336 other Healthcare companies
Valuation
43/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #756 of 1,337 · scores higher than 43% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score134 peers with a valuation score of 40–49, including CRL · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 43?
Weighted metrics compared with all Healthcare companies.A mix: stronger free cash flow yield, but weaker earnings yield than most Healthcare peers.
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. Earnings yield: -1.4% vs peer median 1.5%
- EBITDA yield is close to the peer norm. EBITDA yield: 4.3% vs peer median 4.0%
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 62% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 2.2% vs peer median 0.0%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = CRL, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | CRL | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,287 reported | -1.4% | 1.5% | 36% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,357 reported | 4.3% | 4.2% | 51% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 711 reported | 2.2% | -1.0% | 62% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,306 reported | 16.9% | 37.9% | 24% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around CRL| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 21.3B HKD (≈$2.7B) | 99 | 68 | |
| 1 | 1.1B HKD (≈$146M) | 99 | 72 | |
| 1 | 14.2B HKD (≈$1.8B) | 99 | 64 | |
| 1 | 52.2B HKD (≈$6.7B) | 99 | 56 | |
| 1 | 3.5B HKD (≈$451M) | 99 | 51 | |
| 756 | 14.0B CNY (≈$2.0B) | 43 |
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