Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Rio Tinto Group
How Rio Tinto Group stacks up
RIO · against 13 other Basic Materials companies of similar size
Growth
46/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #11 of 14 · scores higher than 23% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score2 peers with a growth score of 40–49, including RIO · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 46?
Weighted metrics compared with all Basic Materials companies.Its metrics sit close to the Basic Materials norm.
- slower growth in earnings per share: weaker than 70% of peers. Earnings per share growth: -13.7% vs peer median 9.4%
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: 0.9% vs peer median -0.0%
- Revenue growth is close to the peer norm. Revenue growth: 6.3% vs peer median 3.4%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = RIO, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | RIO | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 14 reported | 6.3% | 6.9% | 38% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 13 reported | -13.7% | 35.7% | 0% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 14 reported | 0.9% | 3.7% | 23% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around RIO| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 84.6B USD | 95 | 82 | |
| 2 | 88.7B USD | 92 | 63 | |
| 3 | 113.2B USD | 88 | 86 | |
| 4 | 149.9B USD | 86 | 76 | |
| 5 | 725.9B HKD (≈$92.9B) | 78 | 71 | |
| 7 | 198.6B USD | 63 | 70 | |
| 8 | 85.4B USD | 57 | 46 | |
| 9 | 235.8B USD | 56 | 51 | |
| 10 | 82.7B USD | 54 | 45 | |
| 11 | 132.7B USD | 46 | 64 | |
| 12 | 116.5B EUR (≈$128.2B) | 42 | 47 | |
| 13 | 2.15T TWD (≈$66.6B) | 39 | 36 | |
| 14 | 69.7B USD | 31 | 19 |
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