Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
WILC · against 801 other Consumer Defensive companies
Ranked #120 of 802 · scores higher than 85% of peers · safety percentile 85
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 80–89, including WILC · Click a bar to see the companies
Mainly thanks to its current ratio and debt / equity, which are stronger 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 | WILC | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / equityLower is better · 784 reported | 0.01× | 0.44× | 93% | 33% | |
| BetaLower is better · 792 reported | 1.17 | 0.32 | 4% | 33% | |
| Current ratioHigher is better · 788 reported | 9.68× | 1.53× | 98% | 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 | |
| 116 | 4.7B SGD (≈$3.5B) | 86 | 91 | |
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
| 117 |
| 7.8B CNY (≈$1.1B) |
| 86 |
| 51 |
| 118 | 1.9B USD | 85 | 85 |
| 119 | 1.2B EUR (≈$1.3B) | 85 | 91 |
| 120 | 397M USD | 85 | 72 |
| 121 | 36.93T IDR (≈$2.3B) | 85 | 86 |
| 122 | 19.8B CNY (≈$2.8B) | 85 | 81 |
| 123 | 163.7B INR (≈$2.0B) | 85 | 63 |
| 124 | 425M NZD (≈$255M) | 85 | 76 |