Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to IDACORP, Inc.
How IDACORP, Inc. stacks up
IDA · against 80 other Utilities companies of similar size
Growth
41/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #47 of 81 · scores higher than 43% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score9 peers with a growth score of 40–49, including IDA · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 41?
Weighted metrics compared with all Utilities companies.Its metrics sit close to the Utilities norm.
- slower revenue growth over the last year: weaker than 67% of peers. Revenue growth: -1.7% vs peer median 2.5%
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: 1.4% vs peer median 2.0%
- Earnings per share growth is close to the peer norm. Earnings per share growth: 3.1% vs peer median 1.7%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = IDA, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | IDA | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 81 reported | -1.7% | 1.7% | 33% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 71 reported | 3.1% | 3.1% | 50% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 81 reported | 1.4% | 1.5% | 49% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around IDA| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 48.3B BRL (≈$8.7B) | 100 | 69 | |
| 1 | 9.1B USD | 100 | 52 | |
| 3 | 11.3B GBP (≈$14.7B) | 99 | 66 | |
| 4 | 5.4B USD | 98 | 77 | |
| 5 | 15.4B USD | 97 | 54 | |
| 43 | 5.3B USD | 45 | 44 | |
| 44 | 37.0B BRL (≈$6.7B) | 44 | 67 | |
| 45 | 55.0B HKD (≈$7.0B) | 42 | 63 | |
| 45 | 7.6B USD | 42 | 46 | |
| 47 | 8.4B USD | 41 | 43 | |
| 48 | 45.0B MYR (≈$9.9B) | 39 | 39 | |
| 49 | 2.24T JPY (≈$15.2B) | 38 | 55 | |
| 50 | 10.1B USD | 37 | 46 | |
| 51 | 49.2B HKD (≈$6.3B) | 36 | 50 |
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