Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Phibro Animal Health Corporation
How Phibro Animal Health Corporation stacks up
PAHC · against 1,336 other Healthcare companies
Valuation
84/ 100
Near the top of its peers.
Ranked #209 of 1,337 · scores higher than 84% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score133 peers with a valuation score of 80–89, including PAHC · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 84?
Weighted metrics compared with all Healthcare companies.Mainly thanks to its earnings yield and EBITDA yield, which are stronger than most Healthcare peers.
- Free cash flow yield is close to the peer norm. Free cash flow yield: 0.6% vs peer median 0.0%
- more operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: stronger than 83% of peers. EBITDA yield: 11.8% vs peer median 4.0%
- higher earnings for the price paid: stronger than 86% of peers. Earnings yield: 6.5% vs peer median 1.5%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = PAHC, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | PAHC | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,287 reported | 6.6% | 1.5% | 86% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,357 reported | 10.9% | 4.2% | 83% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 711 reported | 0.6% | -1.0% | 55% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,306 reported | 25.2% | 37.9% | 35% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around PAHC| 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 | |
| 209 | 1.9B EUR (≈$2.1B) | 84 | 52 |
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