Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to California Water Service Group
How California Water Service Group stacks up
CWT · against 357 other Utilities companies
Profitability
36/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #228 of 358 · scores higher than 36% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the profitability score36 peers with a profitability score of 30–39, including CWT · Click a bar to see the companies
Why profitability scores 36?
Weighted metrics compared with all Utilities companies.Mainly because of its return on invested capital and return on assets, which are weaker than most Utilities peers.
- a lower return on invested capital: weaker than 64% of peers. Return on invested capital: 4.2% vs peer median 5.2%
- a lower return on assets: weaker than 61% of peers. Return on assets: 2.2% vs peer median 2.7%
- Operating margin is close to the peer norm. Operating margin: 18.5% vs peer median 18.6%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = CWT, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | CWT | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return on invested capitalHigher is better · 349 reported | 4.2% | 5.2% | 36% | 33% | |
| Operating marginHigher is better · 353 reported | 18.5% | 18.6% | 49% | 33% | |
| Return on assetsHigher is better · 345 reported | 2.2% | 2.7% | 39% | 33% | |
| Return on equityHigher is better · 342 reported | 7.7% | 8.1% | 45% | Context only | |
| Gross marginHigher is better · 361 reported | 53.3% | 35.5% | 81% | Context only |
Ranking by profitability score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around CWTScores 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