Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
WF · against 166 other Banks & Insurance companies of similar size
Ranked #152 of 167 · scores higher than 8% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the profitability score15 peers with a profitability score of 20–29, including WF · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly because of its return on assets and return on equity, which are weaker than most Banks & Insurance peers.
| Metric | WF | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return on invested capitalHigher is better · 135 reported | 9.2% | 10.5% | 42% | Context only | |
| Operating marginHigher is better · 19 reported | Not reported | 15.4% | — | — | Context only |
| Return on assetsHigher is better · 167 reported | 0.5% | 1.3% | 10% | 50% | |
| Return on equityHigher is better · 165 reported | 8.6% | 12.7% | 10% | 50% | |
| Gross marginHigher is better · 171 reported | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0% | Context only |
Metrics with no weight are context only: for banks, brokers and insurers, free cash flow, EBITDA, gross margin and current ratio mostly reflect trading and funding flows, not the health of the business.
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
| Rank | Company | Market cap | Profitability | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 79.2B BRL (≈$14.3B) | 98 | 61 | |
| 1 | 536.3B ZAR (≈$29.5B) | 98 | 54 | |
| 1 | 24.3B AUD (≈$16.0B) | 98 | 45 | |
| 1 | 11.4B USD | 98 | 66 | |
| 1 | 8.7B USD | 98 | 61 | |
| 150 | 32.0B USD | 26 | 31 | |
| 150 | 29.8B USD | 26 | 19 | |
| 152 | 457.3B TWD (≈$14.2B) | 24 | ||
| 152 | 1.37T JPY (≈$9.3B) | 24 | 49 | |
| 152 | 16.1B USD | 24 | 23 | |
| 155 | 353.1B THB (≈$9.9B) | 23 | 45 | |
| 156 | 1.71T JPY (≈$11.6B) | 22 | 40 | |
| 156 | 15.5B USD | 22 | 46 | |
| 156 | 16.4B EUR (≈$18.1B) | 22 | 26 |
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