Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Mercury Systems, Inc.
How Mercury Systems, Inc. stacks up
MRCY · against 472 other Industrials companies listed in US-listed
Valuation
17/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #394 of 473 · scores higher than 15% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score31 peers with a valuation score of 10–19, including MRCY · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 17?
Weighted metrics compared with all Industrials companies.Mainly because of its earnings yield, EBITDA yield and free cash flow yield, which are weaker than most Industrials peers.
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. Earnings yield: -0.6% vs peer median 3.8%
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 82% of peers. EBITDA yield: 1.6% vs peer median 6.9%
- less free cash flow for the price paid: weaker than 68% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 1.4% vs peer median 3.7%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = MRCY, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | MRCY | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 468 reported | -0.6% | 3.0% | 23% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 472 reported | 1.6% | 6.3% | 15% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 430 reported | 1.4% | 3.3% | 30% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 466 reported | 31.3% | 32.3% | 49% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around MRCY| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 462M USD | 100 | 86 | |
| 1 | 323M USD | 100 | 82 | |
| 1 | 1.5B USD | 100 | 78 | |
| 1 | 3.0B USD | 100 | 62 | |
| 1 | 3.5B USD | 100 | 57 | |
| 393 | 6.4B USD | 18 | 62 | |
| 394 | 446M USD |
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