Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc.
How DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. stacks up
DV · against 142 other Communication Services companies listed in US-listed
Valuation
42/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #84 of 143 · scores higher than 42% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score17 peers with a valuation score of 40–49, including DV · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 42?
Weighted metrics compared with all Communication Services companies.Its metrics sit close to the Communication Services norm.
- EBITDA yield is close to the peer norm. EBITDA yield: 7.2% vs peer median 8.6%
- Earnings yield is close to the peer norm. Earnings yield: 2.8% vs peer median 2.9%
- Free cash flow yield is close to the peer norm. Free cash flow yield: 7.7% vs peer median 7.4%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = DV, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | DV | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 140 reported | 2.6% | 3.0% | 47% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 144 reported | 7.2% | 9.3% | 41% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 131 reported | 7.6% | 7.5% | 52% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 144 reported | 52.2% | 45.9% | 54% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around DV| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.5B USD | 99 | 79 | |
| 2 | 4.5B USD | 98 | 64 | |
| 3 | 743M USD | 97 | 67 | |
| 3 | 659M USD | 97 | 81 | |
| 5 | 393M USD | 96 | 78 | |
| 80 | 3.2B USD | 44 | 57 | |
| 80 | 10.3B USD | 44 | 50 | |
| 82 | 2.0B USD | 43 | 65 | |
| 82 | 2.5B USD | 43 | 43 | |
| 84 | 2.1B USD | 42 | 64 | |
| 85 | 264.1B USD | 41 | 59 | |
| 85 | 16.3B USD | 41 | 45 | |
| 87 | 37.7B USD | 40 | 58 | |
| 87 | 1.58T USD | 40 | 67 |
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