Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
UTI · against 801 other Consumer Defensive companies
Ranked #687 of 802 · scores higher than 14% of peers · safety percentile 14
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the safety percentile (higher = safer; 67+ earns the lower-risk grade)80 peers with a safety percentile of 10–19, including UTI · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly because of its beta and debt / equity, which are weaker than most Consumer Defensive peers.
Risk is relative to the sector, not a bankruptcy probability. Banks and brokers carry high leverage by design, and share buybacks can shrink equity and current assets, which raises debt/equity on paper.
| Metric | UTI | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / equityLower is better · 784 reported | 1.04× | 0.44× | 22% | 33% | |
| BetaLower is better · 792 reported | 1.17 | 0.32 | 4% | 33% | |
| Current ratioHigher is better · 788 reported | 1.30× | 1.53× | 40% | 33% |
| Rank | Company | Market cap | Safety | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 159.9B JPY (≈$1.1B) | 100 | 74 | |
| 1 | 20.8B THB (≈$583M) | 100 | 63 | |
| 1 | 9.30T IDR (≈$577M) | 100 | 82 | |
| 1 | 60.4B THB (≈$1.7B) | 100 | 65 | |
| 5 | 968M MYR (≈$213M) | 100 | 94 | |
| 683 | 2.3B CNY (≈$329M) | 15 | 24 |
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
| 684 | 536M USD | 15 | 39 |
| 685 | 1.2B HKD (≈$150M) | 15 | 61 |
| 686 | 5.6B CNY (≈$783M) | 14 | 29 |
| 687 | 1.2B USD | 14 | 40 |
| 688 | 50.0B JPY (≈$340M) | 14 | 44 |
| 689 | 54.1B HKD (≈$6.9B) | 14 | 41 |
| 690 | 781M AUD (≈$515M) | 14 | 40 |
| 691 | 2.4B GBP (≈$3.1B) | 14 | 36 |