Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
NFLX · against 475 other Communication Services companies
Ranked #298 of 476 · scores higher than 37% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score47 peers with a valuation score of 30–39, including NFLX · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly because of its free cash flow yield and EBITDA yield, which are weaker than most Communication Services peers.
| Metric | NFLX | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 461 reported | 4.6% | 3.3% | 60% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 491 reported | 4.9% | 8.7% | 32% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 219 reported | 3.8% | 7.6% | 30% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 440 reported | 10.4% | 47.2% | 13% | Context only |
| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 718.4B KRW (≈$517M) | 100 | 66 | |
| 1 | 243M SEK (≈$24M) | 100 | 64 | |
| 3 | 130.4B KRW (≈$94M) | 99 | 80 | |
| 3 | 2.7B HKD (≈$343M) | 99 | 80 | |
| 3 | 3.3B HKD (≈$423M) | 99 | 74 | |
| 294 | 10.5B USD | 38 | 59 | |
| 298 |
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
| 3.6B NZD (≈$2.2B) |
| 37 |
| 53 |
| 298 | 1.7B USD | 37 | 53 |
| 298 | 1.1B AUD (≈$717M) | 37 | 40 |
| 298 | 290.2B USD | 37 | 58 |
| 298 | 2.3B USD | 37 | 33 |
| 303 | 1.85T JPY (≈$12.6B) | 36 | 78 |
| 303 | 4.3B EUR (≈$4.7B) | 36 | 44 |
| 303 | 313M USD | 36 | 26 |