Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
SENS · against 1,336 other Healthcare companies
Ranked #953 of 1,337 · scores higher than 8% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score385 peers with a valuation score of 0–9, including SENS · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly because of its EBITDA yield, earnings yield and free cash flow yield, which are weaker than most Healthcare peers.
| Metric | SENS | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,287 reported | -25.3% | 1.5% | 10% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,357 reported | -27.4% | 4.2% | 8% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 711 reported | -20.7% | -1.0% | 15% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,306 reported | 19.3% | 37.9% | 27% | Context only |
| 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 | |
| 953 | 6.0B USD | 8 | 32 |
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
| 953 | 388M USD | 8 | 36 |
| 953 | 730M USD | 8 | 11 |
| 953 | 2.0B USD | 8 | 26 |
| 953 | 468M USD | 8 | 40 |
| 953 | 2.0B USD | 8 | 53 |
| 953 | 519M USD | 8 | 22 |
| 953 | 1.2B USD | 8 | 40 |
| 953 | 1.1B USD | 8 | 50 |