Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
PBFS · against 203 other Banks & Insurance companies of similar size
Ranked #140 of 204 · scores higher than 30% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the profitability score14 peers with a profitability score of 20–29, including PBFS · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly because of its return on equity and return on assets, which are weaker than most Banks & Insurance peers.
| Metric | PBFS | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return on invested capitalHigher is better · 187 reported | 6.6% | 9.1% | 39% | Context only | |
| Operating marginHigher is better · 35 reported | Not reported | 9.3% | — | — | Context only |
| Return on assetsHigher is better · 206 reported | 0.8% | 1.1% | 36% | 50% | |
| Return on equityHigher is better · 202 reported | 5.2% | 10.3% | 24% | 50% | |
| Gross marginHigher is better · 214 reported | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1% | Context only |
Metrics with no weight are context only: for banks, brokers and insurers, free cash flow, EBITDA, gross margin and current ratio mostly reflect trading and funding flows, not the health of the business.
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
| Rank | Company | Market cap | Profitability | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 98.7B JPY (≈$671M) | 98 | 43 | |
| 2 | 447.9B KRW (≈$322M) | 97 | ||
| 2 | 289M USD | 97 | 85 | |
| 4 | 16.3B THB (≈$458M) | 96 | 71 | |
| 4 | 332M EUR (≈$365M) | 96 | 70 | |
| 139 | 498M EUR (≈$548M) | 21 | 41 | |
| 140 | 6.90T IDR (≈$428M) | 20 | 55 | |
| 140 | 706M USD | 20 | 24 | |
| 140 | 572M EUR (≈$629M) | 20 | 27 | |
| 140 | 439M USD | 20 | ||
| 144 | 857M AUD (≈$566M) | 19 | 23 | |
| 145 | 1.9B BRL (≈$341M) | 18 | ||
| 145 | 714M USD | 18 | 9 | |
| 147 | 109.2B JPY (≈$743M) | 17 | 59 |
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