This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
billion with EBIT margin increasing to 16.6% Currently the company is trading at CHF 30 per share with a marketcapitalization of CHF 56.1 The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of CHF 47 to 83 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. Sales rose 5% to CHF 7.1
billion with EBIT margin increasing to 16.6% Currently the company is trading at CHF 30 per share with a marketcapitalization of CHF 56.1 The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of CHF 47 to 83 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. Sales rose 5% to CHF 7.1
It sustains its FY 2023 production and capital spending outlook. Share Price Performance The company has a marketcapitalization of more than $32 billion, however, its share price is still down roughly 30% from highs set last year. billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E.
The current price of $133 represents a marketcapitalization of $145 billion. The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $81 to $158 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.
The current price of $133 represents a marketcapitalization of $145 billion. The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $81 to $158 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.
With a marketcapitalization of €395 billion, it is the most valuable company in Europe. The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of €305 billion to €492 billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. Let us know in the comments.
The company is one of the world’s largest companies with a marketcapitalization of $1.34 The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $1,517 billion to $2,344 billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. The post AI technology, a serious threat for Alphabet?
Emphasizing the company’s robust market performance, Nvidia’s marketcapitalization has hit the USD 1 trillion milestone, joining the elite league of tech behemoths such as Apple and Amazon. Reflecting strong Q1 2023 performance and favorable market trends, NVIDIA’s current share price stands at USD 430.39.
We used the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E of a group of similar listed peers for our Trading Comparables analysis, arriving at a valuation range of $193 billion to $237 billion. Alibaba’s current marketcapitalization of $167 billion suggests that the company is undervalued. Disclaimer.
billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT, P/E and P/B. In comparison to Cameco marketcapitalization of CAD 18.3 In comparison to Cameco marketcapitalization of CAD 18.3 The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of CAD 6.4 billion to CAD 28.1
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $257 billion to $296 billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Visa’s marketcapitalization of $471 billion we suggest that the company is significantly overvalued. Let us know in the comments.
billion to USD 108 billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to PMI marketcapitalization of USD 140 billion we suggest that the company is fairly valued. In comparison to PMI marketcapitalization of USD 140 billion we suggest that the company is fairly valued.
billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Marriott marketcapitalization of USD 52.9 Link to the valuation Disclaimer This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. billion using a WACC of 11.3%. billion to USD 71.14
billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Oneok marketcapitalization of USD 25.9 In comparison to Oneok marketcapitalization of USD 25.9 The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of USD 15.5 billion to USD 32.3
billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Kraft Heinz Company marketcapitalization of USD 47.4 Link to the valuation Disclaimer This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. billion using a WACC of 6.3%.
billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Kraft Heinz Company marketcapitalization of USD 47.4 Link to the valuation Disclaimer This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. billion using a WACC of 6.3%.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $121 billion to $150 billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA and EV/EBIT. In comparison to Boeing’s marketcapitalization of $127 billion we suggest that the company is fairly valued. billion to $150 billion.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $83 billion to $118 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Starbucks’ marketcapitalization of $120 billion we suggest that the company is slightly overvalued. . billion to $118 billion. Disclaimer.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $202 billion to $231 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Home Depot’s marketcapitalization of $319 billion we suggest that the company is overvalued. Link to valuation. Disclaimer.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $83 billion to $118 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Starbucks’ marketcapitalization of $120 billion we suggest that the company is slightly overvalued. . billion to $118 billion. Disclaimer.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $202 billion to $231 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Home Depot’s marketcapitalization of $319 billion we suggest that the company is overvalued. Link to valuation. Disclaimer.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of USD 503 billion to USD 812 billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Meta’s marketcapitalization of USD 730 billion we suggest that the company is fairly valued. Microsoft Corporation.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of USD 106 billion to USD 235 billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to IBM marketcapitalization of USD 114 billion we suggest that the company is undervalued. and Alphabet Inc.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of GBP 98 (USD 199) billion to GBP 137 (USD 166) billion by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT, P/E and P/B. In comparison to BP’s marketcapitalization of GBP 101 (USD 122) billion we suggest that the company is slightly undervalued.
billion to HKD 3,905 (USD 501) billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Tencent’s marketcapitalization of HKD 3,070 (USD 386.6) In comparison to Tencent’s marketcapitalization of HKD 3,070 (USD 386.6) billion to HKD 3,905 (USD 501) billion. Disclaimer.
We came up with this valuation range by using the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E of peers such as Nike and Puma. . This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. By combining these two approaches we arrive at a fairly wide valuation range of €15.6 billion to €44.9
Our Trading Comparables analysis produced a valuation range of €178 billion to €222 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT, P/E and P/B. At TotalEnergies’ current marketcapitalization of €148 billion, our analysis suggests that the company is undervalued. Link to detailed valuation.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of €98 to €222 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Anheuser-Busch InBev’s marketcapitalization of €112 billion we suggest that the company is undervalued. . Link to the detailed valuation. Disclaimer.
billion to HKD 3,905 (USD 501) billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Tencent’s marketcapitalization of HKD 3,070 (USD 386.6) In comparison to Tencent’s marketcapitalization of HKD 3,070 (USD 386.6) billion to HKD 3,905 (USD 501) billion. Disclaimer.
billion to HKD 3,905 (USD 501) billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Tencent’s marketcapitalization of HKD 3,070 (USD 386.6) In comparison to Tencent’s marketcapitalization of HKD 3,070 (USD 386.6) billion to HKD 3,905 (USD 501) billion. Disclaimer.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of €98 to €222 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Anheuser-Busch InBev’s marketcapitalization of €112 billion we suggest that the company is undervalued. . Link to the detailed valuation. Disclaimer.
Our Trading Comparables analysis produced a valuation range of €178 billion to €222 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT, P/E and P/B. At TotalEnergies’ current marketcapitalization of €148 billion, our analysis suggests that the company is undervalued. Link to detailed valuation.
We came up with this valuation range by using the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E of peers such as Nike and Puma. . This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. By combining these two approaches we arrive at a fairly wide valuation range of €15.6 billion to €44.9
billion to USD 150 billion, by utilizing observed metrics such as EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT, and P/E ratios. For a robust comparative landscape, we enlisted similar market players like Alphabet Inc.(Youtube), Disclaimer This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Youtube), Apple Inc.
Visa is currently the 11th most valuable company globally in terms of marketcapitalization. Additionally, the Trading Comparables analysis generated a v aluation range of USD 220 billion to USD 290 billion, by utilizing observed metrics such as EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT, and P/E ratios.
In this article we explore some of the main valuation methods, including when to adopt them. There are three primary approaches under which most valuation methods sit, which include the income approach, market approach, and asset-based approach. For a thorough description and explanation of a DCF, see our full DCF article here.
It measures of how much free cash flow the company generates annually relative to the company’s size as measured in marketcapitalization. EBIT margin on a slightly lower level given an increase of low-cost manufacturers. The author(s) cannot be held liable for any actions taken as a result of reading this article.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $174 billion to $391 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Oracle’s marketcapitalization of $219 billion we suggest that the company is slightly undervalued. . Link to detailed valuation. Disclaimer.
The Trading Comparables analysis resulted in a valuation range of $174 billion to $391 billion, by applying the observed trading multiples EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT and P/E. In comparison to Oracle’s marketcapitalization of $219 billion we suggest that the company is slightly undervalued. . Link to detailed valuation. Disclaimer.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 8,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content