Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
LQDT · against 1,584 other Consumer Cyclical companies
Ranked #738 of 1,585 · scores higher than 53% of peers · safety percentile 53
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the safety percentile (higher = safer; 67+ earns the lower-risk grade)159 peers with a safety percentile of 50–59, including LQDT · Click a bar to see the companies
A mix: stronger debt / equity, but weaker beta than most Consumer Cyclical peers.
Risk is relative to the sector, not a bankruptcy probability. Banks and brokers carry high leverage by design, and share buybacks can shrink equity and current assets, which raises debt/equity on paper.
| Metric | LQDT | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / equityLower is better · 1,521 reported | 0.06× | 0.50× | 87% | 33% | |
| BetaLower is better · 1,556 reported | 1.04 | 0.56 | 22% | 33% | |
| Current ratioHigher is better · 1,545 reported | 1.58× | 1.48× | 54% | 33% |
| Rank | Company | Market cap | Safety | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 271M MYR (≈$60M) | 100 | 63 | |
| 2 | 321M MYR (≈$71M) | 100 | 50 | |
| 2 | 297M MYR (≈$65M) | 100 | 48 | |
| 2 | 170M MYR (≈$37M) | 100 | 74 | |
| 5 | 61M MYR (≈$13M) | 100 | 29 | |
| 734 | 37.54T KRW (≈$27.0B) | 54 | 65 | |
| 735 |
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
| 3.7B USD |
| 54 |
| 66 |
| 736 | 623.0B KRW (≈$449M) | 54 | 65 |
| 737 | 146.0B KRW (≈$105M) | 54 | 48 |
| 738 | 1.4B USD | 53 | 62 |
| 739 | 4.6B USD | 53 | 74 |
| 740 | 6.4B CNY (≈$899M) | 53 | 62 |
| 741 | 1.8B CNY (≈$251M) | 53 | 50 |
| 742 | 3.2B USD | 53 | 65 |