Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
MICC · against 95 other Consumer Defensive companies of similar size
Ranked #95 of 96 · scores higher than 1% of peers · safety percentile 2
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the safety percentile (higher = safer; 67+ earns the lower-risk grade)14 peers with a safety percentile of 0–9, including MICC · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly because of its debt / equity and current ratio, which are weaker than most Consumer Defensive 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 | MICC | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / equityLower is better · 95 reported | 3.43× | 0.59× | 3% | 33% | |
| BetaLower is better · 93 reported | Not reported | 0.32 | — | — | 33% |
| Current ratioHigher is better · 89 reported | 1.01× | 1.37× | 30% | 33% |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
| Rank | Company | Market cap | Safety | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.06T JPY (≈$7.2B) | 96 | 80 | |
| 2 | 58.1B CNY (≈$8.1B) | 94 | 39 | |
| 3 | 1.68T JPY (≈$11.4B) | 91 | 64 | |
| 4 | 55.6B CNY (≈$7.8B) | 83 | 57 | |
| 5 | 118.9B CNY (≈$16.7B) | 83 | 61 | |
| 91 | 6.5B USD | 5 | 37 | |
| 92 | 11.3B USD | 4 | 35 | |
| 93 | 18.2B USD | 4 | 11 | |
| 94 | 13.1B USD | 3 | 45 | |
| 95 | 11.7B USD | 2 | 35 | |
| 96 | 231.3B TWD (≈$7.2B) | 1 | 35 |
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