Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Manchester
How Manchester stacks up
MANU · against 99 other Communication Services companies of similar size
Valuation
27/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #82 of 100 · scores higher than 17% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score11 peers with a valuation score of 20–29, including MANU · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 27?
Weighted metrics compared with all Communication Services companies.Mainly because of its free cash flow yield and EBITDA yield, which are weaker than most Communication Services peers.
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. Free cash flow yield: -7.6% vs peer median 7.4%
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 64% of peers. EBITDA yield: 6.1% vs peer median 8.6%
- Earnings yield is not reported, so it is left out of the score.
Metric by metric
Position: dot = MANU, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | MANU | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 99 reported | Not reported | 3.9% | — | — | 30% |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 102 reported | 6.1% | 8.3% | 32% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 49 reported | -7.6% | 6.2% | 8% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 97 reported | 6.9% | 43.8% | 7% | 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 MANU| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.5B USD | 98 | 64 | |
| 2 | 6.15T KRW (≈$4.4B) | 94 | 64 | |
| 3 | 166.5B TRY (≈$5.0B) | 93 | 76 | |
| 4 | 44.34T IDR (≈$2.7B) | 92 | 58 | |
| 5 | 2.0B EUR (≈$2.2B) | 90 | 51 | |
| 79 | 39.0B HKD (≈$5.0B) | 30 | 38 | |
| 79 | 3.8B USD | 30 | 39 | |
| 81 | 2.8B USD | 29 | 67 | |
| 82 | 227.4B INR (≈$2.7B) | 27 | 69 | |
| 82 | 3.7B USD | 27 | 23 | |
| 84 | 5.0B AUD (≈$3.3B) | 26 | 49 | |
| 84 | 2.0B CHF (≈$2.3B) | 26 | 34 | |
| 86 | 2.9B USD | 24 | 28 | |
| 87 | 17.5B CNY (≈$2.4B) | 23 | 51 |
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