Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to FLEX LNG Ltd.
How FLEX LNG Ltd. stacks up
FLNG · against 108 other Energy companies of similar size
Growth
48/ 100
Above the middle of the pack.
Ranked #52 of 109 · scores higher than 53% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score11 peers with a growth score of 40–49, including FLNG · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 48?
Weighted metrics compared with all Energy companies.Its metrics sit close to the Energy norm.
- Revenue growth is close to the peer norm. Revenue growth: 1.3% vs peer median 0.5%
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: -0.7% vs peer median -1.3%
- Earnings per share growth is close to the peer norm. Earnings per share growth: 3.7% vs peer median 1.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = FLNG, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | FLNG | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 111 reported | 1.3% | 1.3% | 51% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 74 reported | 3.7% | -20.2% | 66% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 107 reported | -0.7% | -0.0% | 49% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around FLNG| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2.2B USD | 100 | 89 | |
| 2 | 1.2B USD | 99 | 48 | |
| 2 | 1.9B USD | 99 | 49 | |
| 4 | 1.18T ARS (≈$1.2B) | 97 | 98 | |
| 5 | 7.5B CNY (≈$1.1B) | 95 | 38 | |
| 48 | 1.3B USD | 53 | 53 | |
| 49 | 12.5B HKD (≈$1.6B) | 52 | 34 | |
| 49 | 2.7B USD | 52 | 50 | |
| 51 | 1.5B USD | 51 | 51 | |
| 52 | 1.5B USD | 48 | 50 | |
| 53 | 1.6B USD | 47 | 51 | |
| 54 | 1.9B USD | 46 | 20 | |
| 55 | 2.1B AUD (≈$1.4B) | 45 | 68 | |
| 55 | 809M USD | 45 | 39 |
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