Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Lotus Technology Inc.
How Lotus Technology Inc. stacks up
LOT · against 261 other Consumer Cyclical companies of similar size
Valuation
6/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #232 of 262 · scores higher than 8% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score39 peers with a valuation score of 0–9, including LOT · 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: -222.0% vs peer median 6.1%
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. Earnings yield: -249.3% vs peer median 4.4%
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. EBITDA yield: -23.9% vs peer median 8.8%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = LOT, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | LOT | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 247 reported | -165.5% | 4.3% | 2% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 269 reported | -11.0% | 10.5% | 3% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 100 reported | Not reported | 6.8% | — | — | 20% |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 248 reported | -706.9% | 91.6% | 0% | Context only |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around LOT| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 198.5B KRW (≈$143M) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1 | 382.5B KRW (≈$275M) | 100 | 57 | |
| 1 | 412.0B KRW (≈$297M) | 100 | 56 | |
| 1 | 130M EUR (≈$143M) | 100 | 46 | |
| 5 | 1.1B HKD (≈$137M) | 99 | 59 | |
| 232 | 511M SAR (≈$138M) | 6 | 32 | |
| 232 | 1.9B CNY (≈$259M) | 6 | 19 | |
| 232 | 521M MYR (≈$115M) | 6 | 31 | |
| 232 | 9.5B TRY (≈$284M) | 6 | 18 | |
| 232 | 188M USD | 6 | 17 | |
| 232 | 124M USD | 6 | 23 | |
| 232 | 322M USD | 6 | 23 | |
| 232 | 283M USD | 6 | 48 | |
| 232 | 4.1B TRY (≈$123M) | 6 | 6 |
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