Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Graham Corporation
How Graham Corporation stacks up
GHM · against 472 other Industrials companies listed in US-listed
Valuation
21/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #383 of 473 · scores higher than 19% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score53 peers with a valuation score of 20–29, including GHM · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 21?
Weighted metrics compared with all Industrials companies.Mainly because of its EBITDA yield, free cash flow yield and earnings yield, which are weaker than most Industrials peers.
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 76% of peers. EBITDA yield: 2.8% vs peer median 6.9%
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. Free cash flow yield: -0.7% vs peer median 3.7%
- lower earnings for the price paid: weaker than 73% of peers. Earnings yield: 1.4% vs peer median 3.8%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = GHM, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | GHM | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 468 reported | 1.4% | 3.0% | 32% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 472 reported | 2.9% | 6.3% | 19% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 430 reported | -0.7% | 3.3% | 23% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 466 reported | 22.2% | 32.3% | 36% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around GHM| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 462M USD | 100 | 86 | |
| 1 | 323M USD | 100 | 82 | |
| 1 | 1.5B USD | 100 | 78 | |
| 1 | 3.0B USD | 100 | 62 | |
| 1 | 3.5B USD | 100 | 57 | |
| 378 | 316M USD | 22 | 31 | |
| 378 | 1.7B USD |
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