Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
TRDA · against 1,336 other Healthcare companies
Ranked #857 of 1,337 · scores higher than 33% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score133 peers with a valuation score of 30–39, including TRDA · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly because of its earnings yield and free cash flow yield, which are weaker than most Healthcare peers.
| Metric | TRDA | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,287 reported | -83.9% | 1.5% | 3% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,357 reported | -930.2% | 4.2% | 1% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 711 reported | -73.1% | -1.0% | 3% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,306 reported | 137.1% | 37.9% | 93% | 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 | |
| 857 | 158M USD | 33 | 14 |
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
| 857 | 8.8B USD | 33 | 50 |
| 857 | 142M USD | 33 | 45 |
| 857 | 89M USD | 33 | 31 |
| 857 | 184M USD | 33 | 33 |
| 857 | 186M USD | 33 | 52 |
| 857 | 3.3B USD | 33 | 39 |
| 903 | 6.2B CNY (≈$861M) | 32 | 35 |
| 903 | 171.0B KRW (≈$123M) | 32 | 41 |