Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Mastercard Incorporated
How Mastercard Incorporated stacks up
MA · against 131 other Financial Services companies listed in US-listed
Valuation
21/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #105 of 132 · scores higher than 20% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score17 peers with a valuation score of 20–29, including MA · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 21?
Weighted metrics compared with all Financial Services companies.Mainly because of its earnings yield, free cash flow yield and EBITDA yield, which are weaker than most Financial Services peers.
- lower earnings for the price paid: weaker than 75% of peers. Earnings yield: 3.2% vs peer median 6.1%
- less free cash flow for the price paid: weaker than 69% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 3.3% vs peer median 6.3%
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 68% of peers. EBITDA yield: 4.2% vs peer median 6.9%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = MA, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | MA | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 191 reported | 3.2% | 5.3% | 27% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 80 reported | 4.3% | 7.7% | 22% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 133 reported | 3.2% | 5.9% | 31% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 188 reported | 1.1% | 63.8% | 6% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around MA| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 516M USD | 100 | 89 | |
| 1 | 751M USD | 100 | 74 | |
| 3 | 641M USD | 99 | 73 | |
| 4 | 3.8B USD | 98 | 66 | |
| 4 | 71M USD | 98 | 79 | |
| 102 | 3.0B USD | 23 | 57 | |
| 103 | 40.4B USD | 22 | 45 |
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