Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
OCS · against 1,336 other Healthcare companies
Ranked #921 of 1,337 · scores higher than 30% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score133 peers with a valuation score of 30–39, including OCS · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly because of its EBITDA yield and free cash flow yield, which are weaker than most Healthcare peers.
| Metric | OCS | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,287 reported | Not reported | 1.5% | — | — | 30% |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,357 reported | -67.2% | 4.2% | 4% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 711 reported | -18.6% | -1.0% | 17% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,306 reported | 55.4% | 37.9% | 67% | Context only |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 21.3B HKD (≈$2.7B) | 99 | 68 | |
| 1 | 1.1B HKD (≈$146M) | 99 | 72 | |
| 1 | 14.2B HKD (≈$1.8B) | 99 | 64 | |
| 1 | 52.2B HKD (≈$6.7B) | 99 | 56 | |
| 1 | 3.5B HKD (≈$451M) | 99 | 51 | |
| 921 | 84M CAD (≈$61M) | 30 |
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
| 24 |
| 921 | 4.2B USD | 30 | 41 |
| 921 | 2.6B AUD (≈$1.7B) | 30 | 62 |
| 921 | 63M EUR (≈$70M) | 30 | 46 |
| 921 | 424M USD | 30 | 45 |
| 921 | 12M USD | 30 | 38 |
| 921 | 42.8B INR (≈$513M) | 30 | 37 |
| 921 | 5.1B MXN (≈$274M) | 30 | 48 |
| 921 | 4.7B USD | 30 | 42 |