Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
TSLA · against 1,557 other Consumer Cyclical companies
Ranked #1,379 of 1,558 · scores higher than 11% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score156 peers with a valuation score of 10–19, including TSLA · 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 Consumer Cyclical peers.
| Metric | TSLA | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,529 reported | 0.3% | 4.4% | 22% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,595 reported | 0.7% | 8.8% | 11% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 571 reported | 0.4% | 6.2% | 22% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,468 reported | 5.8% | 54.0% | 6% | Context only |
| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 210.5B KRW (≈$152M) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1 | 553.9B KRW (≈$399M) | 100 | 65 | |
| 1 | 444.9B KRW (≈$320M) | 100 | 57 | |
| 1 | 1.91T KRW (≈$1.4B) | 100 | 72 | |
| 1 | 33M MYR (≈$7M) | 100 | 53 | |
| 1,379 | 419M USD | 11 | 11 | |
| 1,379 |
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
| 2.1B USD |
| 11 |
| 16 |
| 1,379 | 997M GBP (≈$1.3B) | 11 | 21 |
| 1,379 | 1.1B USD | 11 | 28 |
| 1,379 | 1.49T USD | 11 | 30 |
| 1,395 | 14.3B CNY (≈$2.0B) | 10 | 19 |
| 1,395 | 4.2B CNY (≈$594M) | 10 | 27 |
| 1,395 | 2.9B CNY (≈$413M) | 10 | 31 |
| 1,395 | 9.5B CNY (≈$1.3B) | 10 | 28 |