Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Himalaya Shipping Ltd.
How Himalaya Shipping Ltd. stacks up
HSHP · against 445 other Industrials companies listed in US-listed
Growth
100/ 100
Near the top of its peers.
Ranked #1 of 446 · scores higher than 99% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score78 peers with a growth score of 90–100, including HSHP · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 100?
Weighted metrics compared with all Industrials companies.Mainly thanks to its earnings per share growth and revenue growth, which are stronger than most Industrials peers.
- 3-year revenue growth is not reported, so it is left out of the score.
- faster revenue growth over the last year: stronger than 95% of peers. Revenue growth: 38.6% vs peer median 4.4%
- faster growth in earnings per share: stronger than 99% of peers. Earnings per share growth: 711.5% vs peer median 7.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = HSHP, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | HSHP | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 462 reported | 38.6% | 8.4% | 90% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 328 reported | 711.5% | 9.2% | 99% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 437 reported | Not reported | 5.2% | — | — | 33% |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around HSHP| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 63.0B USD | 100 | 55 | |
| 1 | 2.5B USD | 100 | 70 | |
| 1 | 8.7B USD | 100 | 53 | |
| 1 | 727M USD | 100 | 66 | |
| 1 | 5.2B USD | 100 | 56 | |
| 1 | 4.6B USD | 100 | 58 | |
| 7 | Unavailable | 99 | 25 | |
| 7 | 261M USD | 99 | 63 |
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