Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Liberty Latin America Ltd.
How Liberty Latin America Ltd. stacks up
LILA · against 470 other Communication Services companies
Valuation
70/ 100
Above the middle of the pack.
Ranked #140 of 471 · scores higher than 70% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score47 peers with a valuation score of 70–79, including LILA · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 70?
Weighted metrics compared with all Communication Services companies.Mainly thanks to its free cash flow yield and EBITDA yield, which are stronger than most Communication Services peers.
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. Earnings yield: -5.6% vs peer median 2.9%
- more operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: stronger than 61% of peers. EBITDA yield: 16.3% vs peer median 8.6%
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 88% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 23.6% vs peer median 7.4%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = LILA, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | LILA | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 461 reported | -5.5% | 3.0% | 17% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 493 reported | 11.0% | 8.7% | 61% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 227 reported | 24.3% | 7.6% | 88% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 467 reported | 30.3% | 48.9% | 33% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around LILA| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 105.8B KRW (≈$76M) | 100 | 80 | |
| 1 | 694.0B KRW (≈$500M) | 100 | 66 | |
| 3 | 2.6B HKD (≈$329M) | 99 | 80 | |
| 3 | 3.1B HKD (≈$398M) | 99 | 74 | |
| 3 | 226M SEK (≈$23M) | 99 | 63 | |
| 135 | 4.2B EUR (≈$4.6B) | 71 | 49 | |
| 140 |
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