Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc.
How Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc. stacks up
LIND · against 417 other Consumer Cyclical companies of similar size
Profitability
63/ 100
Above the middle of the pack.
Ranked #174 of 418 · scores higher than 58% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the profitability score53 peers with a profitability score of 60–69, including LIND · Click a bar to see the companies
Why profitability scores 63?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Mainly thanks to its return on invested capital, which is stronger than most Consumer Cyclical peers.
- a lower return on assets: weaker than 91% of peers. Return on assets: -2.1% vs peer median 3.3%
- Operating margin is close to the peer norm. Operating margin: 7.0% vs peer median 6.4%
- a higher return on invested capital: stronger than 92% of peers. Return on invested capital: 30.7% vs peer median 7.3%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = LIND, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | LIND | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return on invested capitalHigher is better · 396 reported | 30.7% | 8.7% | 94% | 33% | |
| Operating marginHigher is better · 417 reported | 7.0% | 7.8% | 44% | 33% | |
| Return on assetsHigher is better · 397 reported | -2.1% | 4.0% | 5% | 33% | |
| Return on equityHigher is better · 384 reported | Not reported | 10.1% | — | — | Context only |
| Gross marginHigher is better · 421 reported | 46.7% | 31.4% | 76% | Context only |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
Ranking by profitability score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around LIND| Rank | Company | Market cap | Profitability | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 358.0B INR (≈$4.3B) | 100 | 73 | |
| 2 | 5.2B MYR (≈$1.1B) | 99 | 84 | |
| 2 | 106.7B TWD (≈$3.3B) | 99 | 71 | |
| 2 | 2.4B USD | 99 | 65 | |
| 5 | 404.0B JPY (≈$2.7B) | 98 | 90 | |
| 174 | 21.6B CNY (≈$3.0B) | 63 | 65 | |
| 174 | 13.4B CNY (≈$1.9B) | 63 | 59 | |
| 174 | 465.1B JPY (≈$3.2B) | 63 | 68 | |
| 174 | 520.9B JPY (≈$3.5B) | 63 | 71 | |
| 174 | 2.1B USD | 63 | 40 | |
| 179 | 8.1B CNY (≈$1.1B) | 62 | 64 | |
| 179 | 26.4B HKD (≈$3.4B) | 62 | 64 | |
| 179 | 189.7B JPY (≈$1.3B) | 62 | 63 | |
| 179 | 205.2B JPY (≈$1.4B) | 62 | 54 |
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