Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Consolidated Water Co. Ltd.
How Consolidated Water Co. Ltd. stacks up
CWCO · against 358 other Utilities companies
Valuation
35/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #232 of 359 · scores higher than 35% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score36 peers with a valuation score of 30–39, including CWCO · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 35?
Weighted metrics compared with all Utilities companies.Mainly because of its earnings yield and EBITDA yield, which are weaker than most Utilities peers.
- lower earnings for the price paid: weaker than 68% of peers. Earnings yield: 3.7% vs peer median 4.8%
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 68% of peers. EBITDA yield: 7.6% vs peer median 8.6%
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 74% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 7.0% vs peer median 0.0%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = CWCO, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | CWCO | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 356 reported | 3.7% | 5.0% | 32% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 359 reported | 7.2% | 8.6% | 32% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 164 reported | 6.9% | -1.8% | 74% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 341 reported | 51.4% | 64.7% | 35% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around CWCO| 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 | |
| 229 | 606.3B INR (≈$7.3B) | 36 | 48 |
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