Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Moody's Corporation
How Moody's Corporation stacks up
MCO · against 268 other Financial Services companies
Valuation
24/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #204 of 269 · scores higher than 24% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score27 peers with a valuation score of 20–29, including MCO · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 24?
Weighted metrics compared with all Financial Services companies.Mainly because of its earnings yield, EBITDA yield and free cash flow yield, which are weaker than most Financial Services peers.
- lower earnings for the price paid: weaker than 74% of peers. Earnings yield: 3.2% vs peer median 5.7%
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 68% of peers. EBITDA yield: 4.5% vs peer median 6.9%
- less free cash flow for the price paid: weaker than 66% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 3.4% vs peer median 6.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = MCO, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | MCO | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 410 reported | 3.1% | 5.6% | 26% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 206 reported | 4.3% | 6.8% | 32% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 183 reported | 3.4% | 6.1% | 34% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 401 reported | 3.5% | 83.1% | 4% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around MCO| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 498M USD | 100 | 90 | |
| 1 | 641M USD | 100 | 74 | |
| 3 | 82M USD | 99 | 78 | |
| 3 | 827M USD | 99 | 62 | |
| 3 | 659M USD | 99 | 72 | |
| 201 | 88.7B USD | 25 | 39 | |
| 201 | 16.5B GBP (≈$21.4B) | 25 |
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