Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Lucid Group, Inc.
How Lucid Group, Inc. stacks up
LCID · against 1,552 other Consumer Cyclical companies
Valuation
6/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #1,425 of 1,553 · scores higher than 6% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score148 peers with a valuation score of 0–9, including LCID · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 6?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Mainly because of its free cash flow yield, earnings yield and EBITDA yield, which are weaker than most Consumer Cyclical peers.
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. Free cash flow yield: -429.6% vs peer median 6.1%
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. Earnings yield: -324.0% vs peer median 4.4%
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. EBITDA yield: -97.2% vs peer median 8.8%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = LCID, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | LCID | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,527 reported | -454.0% | 4.4% | 1% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,593 reported | -51.3% | 8.8% | 1% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 594 reported | -429.6% | 6.1% | 0% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,536 reported | -88.9% | 57.2% | 1% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around LCID| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 198.5B KRW (≈$143M) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1 | 623.0B KRW (≈$449M) | 100 | 65 | |
| 1 | 382.5B KRW (≈$275M) | 100 | 57 | |
| 1 | 412.0B KRW (≈$297M) | 100 | 56 | |
| 1 | 1.49T KRW (≈$1.1B) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1,425 | 563M USD | 6 | 47 | |
| 1,425 |
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