Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Reading International, Inc.
How Reading International, Inc. stacks up
RDIB · against 142 other Communication Services companies listed in US-listed
Valuation
21/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #122 of 143 · scores higher than 14% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score19 peers with a valuation score of 20–29, including RDIB · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 21?
Weighted metrics compared with all Communication Services companies.Mainly because of its earnings yield, free cash flow yield and EBITDA yield, which are weaker than most Communication Services peers.
- Negative (a loss or cash outflow), so it counts as zero whatever the share price. Earnings yield: -5.0% vs peer median 2.9%
- less free cash flow for the price paid: weaker than 78% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 1.3% vs peer median 7.4%
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 74% of peers. EBITDA yield: 3.6% vs peer median 8.6%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = RDIB, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | RDIB | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 140 reported | -5.2% | 3.0% | 23% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 144 reported | 2.7% | 9.3% | 17% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 131 reported | 1.5% | 7.5% | 23% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 144 reported | -9.7% | 45.9% | 7% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around RDIB| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.5B USD | 99 | 79 | |
| 2 | 4.5B USD | 98 | 64 | |
| 3 | 743M USD | 97 | 67 | |
| 3 | 659M USD | 97 | 81 | |
| 5 | 393M USD | 96 | 78 | |
| 118 | 41.7B USD | 23 | 37 | |
| 120 | 630M 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