Power Metallic Mines Inc.: Fundamental Analysis and Financial Ratings | IVV1 | CA73929R1055
|
Market Closed –
|
5-day change | 1st Jan Change | ||
|
0.6380 EUR |
+5.63% | -8.86% | -23.32% | |
Trader
Trader
This super rating is the result of a weighted average of the rankings based on the following ratings: Global Valuation (Composite), EPS Revisions (4 months), and Visibility (Composite). We recommend that you carefully review the associated descriptions.
–
Investor
Investor
This super composite rating is the result of a weighted average of the rankings based on the following ratings: Fundamentals (Composite), Global Valuation (Composite), EPS Revisions (1 year), and Visibility (Composite). We recommend that you carefully review the associated descriptions.
–
Global
Global
This composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings based on the following ratings: Fundamentals (Composite), Valuation (Composite), Financial Estimates Revisions (Composite), Consensus (Composite), and Visibility (Composite). The company must be covered by at least 4 of these 5 ratings for the calculation to be performed. We recommend that you carefully review the associated descriptions.
–
Quality
Quality
This composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings based on the following ratings: Capital Efficiency (Composite), Quality of Financial Reporting (Composite), and Financial Health (Composite). The company must be covered by at least 2 of these 3 ratings for the calculation to be performed. We recommend that you carefully review the associated descriptions.
–
ESG MSCI
ESG MSCI
The MSCI ESG score assesses a company’s environmental, social, and governance practices relative to its industry peers. Companies are rated from CCC (laggard) to AAA (leader). This rating helps investors incorporate sustainability risks and opportunities into their investment decisions.
–
Highlights: Power Metallic Mines Inc.
- Analysts covering this company mostly recommend stock overweighting or purchase.
- The average target price set by analysts covering the stock is above current prices and offers a tremendous appreciation potential.
- The average price target of analysts who are interested in the stock has been strongly revised upwards over the last four months.
| Power Metallic Mines Inc. | Sector | Germany | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Fundamentals |
Fundamentals This composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings according to the Growth (Composite), Capital Efficiency (Composite), Profitability (Composite), Financial Health (Composite) and CAPEX/EBITDA ratings. The company must be covered by at least four of these five ratings for the calculation to be performed. We recommend that you read the associated descriptions carefully. |
– | ||
|
|
Growth This composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings according to the Revenue growth, EPS growth and FCF growth ratings. If the company is covered by at least two of these three ratings, the calculation is performed. We recommend that you read the associated descriptions carefully. |
– | ||
|
|
Revenue growth This rating is based on the strength, consistency and improvement of the company’s revenue growth over a 6-year window (5 growth rates), taking into account both the last 3 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 3 years. The greater the sales growth is in terms of significance, consistency, and improvement, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
EPS growth This rating is based on the strength, consistency, and improvement of the company’s net earnings per share growth over a 6-year window, taking into account both the last 3 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 3 years. The greater the EPS growth is in terms of significance, consistency, and improvement, the better the rating. Please note that a company can show strong EPS growth even if the EPS itself is negative. Use the Net Margin rating to filter out these cases if they are of no interest to you. |
– | ||
|
|
FCF growth This rating is based on the strength, consistency, and improvement of the company’s FCF growth over a 6-year window, taking into account both the last 3 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 3 years. The greater the cash flow growth is in terms of significance, consistency, and improvement, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
Profitability This composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings according to the EBITDA margin, EBIT margin and Net margin ratings. If the company is covered by at least two of these three ratings, the calculation is performed. We recommend that you read the associated descriptions carefully. |
– | ||
|
|
EBITDA Margin The EBITDA margin measures the share of revenue remaining after operating expenses, but before depreciation, provisions, interest, and taxes. It is calculated by dividing EBITDA by revenue and expressing the result as a percentage. A higher margin indicates stronger gross operating profitability, regardless of the company’s financial and tax structure. |
– | ||
|
|
EBIT Margin This rating is based on the level and consistency of the company’s EBIT margin over a 4-year window, taking into account both the last 2 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 2 years. The higher and more consistent the EBIT margin, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
Net Margin This rating is based on the level and consistency of the company’s Net margin over a 4-year window, taking into account both the last 2 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 2 years. The higher and more consistent the Net margin, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
Capital Efficiency This composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings according to the ROE, ROA and ROCE ratings. If the company is covered by at least two of these three ratings, the calculation is performed. We recommend that you read the associated descriptions carefully. |
– | ||
|
|
ROA This rating is based on the level and consistency of the company’s ROA over a 4-year window, taking into account both the last 2 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 2 years. The higher and more consistent the ROA, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
ROCE This rating is based on the level and consistency of the company’s ROCE over a 4-year window, taking into account both the last 2 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 2 years. The higher and more consistent the ROCE, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
ROE This rating is based on the level and consistency of the company’s ROE over a 4-year window, taking into account both the last 2 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 2 years. The higher and more consistent the ROE, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
Financial Health This composite rating is the result of an average of the Leverage and Gearing ratings. The company must be covered by both ratings for the calculation to be made. |
– | ||
|
|
Gearing This rating is based on the company’s average Net Debt / Equity ratio for the last published fiscal year, the current one, and the upcoming one. The lower this level, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
Leverage This rating is based on the company’s average Net Debt / EBITDA ratio for the last published fiscal year, the current one, and the upcoming one. The lower this level, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
Capital Intensity The CAPEX / EBITDA ratio compares capital expenditures with operating earnings as measured by EBITDA. It indicates the company’s capital intensity: the higher the ratio, the larger the share of operating cash flow that must be reinvested to maintain or expand productive capacity. A low ratio, by contrast, suggests less dependence on heavy investments, leaving more room for debt reduction or shareholder returns. |
– |
Growth
|
Balance sheet growth |
Balance sheet growth This rating is based on the strength, consistency and improvement of the company’s total book value growth over a 6-year window (5 growth rates), taking into account both the last 3 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 3 years. The greater the balance sheet growth is in terms of significance, consistency, and improvement, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
Long Term balance sheet growth |
Long Term balance sheet growth This rating is based on the strength, consistency and improvement of the company’s total book value growth over a 13-year window (12 growth rates), taking into account both the last 10 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 3 years. The greater the balance sheet growth is in terms of significance, consistency, and improvement, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
Long term revenue growth |
Long term revenue growth This rating is based on the strength, consistency and improvement of the company’s revenue growth over a 13-year window (12 growth rates), taking into account both the last 10 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 3 years. The greater the sales growth is in terms of significance, consistency, and improvement, the better the rating. A key characteristic for investors seeking companies with strong development potential. |
– | ||
|
Long term EPS growth |
Long term EPS growth This rating is based on the strength, consistency and improvement of the company’s earnings per share (EPS) growth over a 13-year window (12 growth rates), taking into account both the last 10 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 3 years. The greater the EPS growth is in terms of significance, consistency, and improvement, the better the rating. Please note that a company may display strong EPS growth even if the actual EPS remains negative. Use the Net Margin rating as an additional filter if you wish to exclude such cases. |
– |
More ratings”
data-not-collapsed=” Fewer ratings”
> More ratings
| Power Metallic Mines Inc. | Sector | Germany | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Global Valuation |
Global Valuation This composite rating results from the average of the rankings based on the Equity Valuation (Composite) and Enterprise Valuation (Composite) ratings. The company must be covered by both ratings for the calculation to be performed. We recommend that you carefully review the associated descriptions. |
– | ||
|
|
Enterprise value Enterprise Value reflects the total value of a company from the perspective of a buyer. It equals market capitalization plus net debt (financial debt minus cash). Unlike market cap alone, it accounts for all capital providers — both shareholders and lenders. |
– | ||
|
|
EV/Revenue This rating is based on the company’s average Enterprise Value to Revenue (EV/Revenue) ratio for the last reported fiscal year, the current one, and the upcoming one. For the last fiscal year, the Enterprise Value as of the publication date is used. However, the subsequent ratios are calculated based on Enterprise Value estimates. A lower average EV/Revenue ratio results in a better rating. |
– | ||
|
|
EV/EBITDA This rating is based on the company’s average Enterprise Value to EBITDA (EV/EBITDA) ratio for the last reported fiscal year, the current one, and the upcoming one. For the last fiscal year, the Enterprise Value as of the publication date is used. However, the subsequent ratios are calculated based on Enterprise Value estimates. A lower average EV/EBITDA ratio results in a better rating. |
– | ||
|
|
EV/FCF This rating is based on the company’s average Enterprise Value to Free Cash Flow (EV/FCF) ratio for the last reported fiscal year, the current one, and the upcoming one. For the last fiscal year, the Enterprise Value as of the publication date is used. However, the subsequent ratios are calculated based on Enterprise Value estimates. A lower average EV/FCF ratio results in a better rating. |
– | ||
|
|
Equity Valuation This composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings according to the P/E, PBR and dividend yield ratings. If the company is covered by at least two of these three ratings, the calculation is performed. We recommend that you read the associated descriptions carefully. |
– | ||
|
|
P/E This rating is based on the average Price/Earnings (P/E) ratio of the company for the last reported fiscal year, the current one, and the upcoming one. For the last fiscal year, the stock price on the date of the EPS publication is used. However, the following ratios are calculated based on the last known stock price and EPS estimates. The lower the average level, the better the rating. |
– | ||
|
|
PBR The PBR compares a company’s share price to its book value per share, representing shareholders’ equity. It indicates how the market values a firm relative to its net assets. However, it’s not a reliable metric across industries, since balance sheet structures differ widely. |
– | ||
|
|
Dividend Yield This rating is based on the level and consistency of the company’s dividend yield over a 4-year window, taking into account both the last 2 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 2 years. The higher and more consistent the dividend yield, the better the rating. |
– |
|
EV/EBIT |
EV/EBIT This rating is based on the company’s average Enterprise Value to EBIT (EV/EBIT) ratio for the last reported fiscal year, the current one, and the upcoming one. For the last fiscal year, the Enterprise Value as of the publication date is used. However, the subsequent ratios are calculated based on Enterprise Value estimates. A lower average EV/EBIT ratio results in a better rating. |
– | ||
|
CAPEX/Revenue |
CAPEX/Revenue This rating is based on the company’s average CAPEX / Revenue ratio over a 4-year window, taking into account both the last 2 completed financial years and the outlook for the next 2 years. The lower is the average, the better the rating. |
– |
More ratings”
data-not-collapsed=” Fewer ratings”
> More ratings
| Power Metallic Mines Inc. | Sector | Germany | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Consensus |
Consensus This intermediate composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings according to the following ratings: Target Price Evolution (1 year), Target Price Evolution (4 months), Analysts’ Target Price, Analysts’ Recommendations Evolution (1 year), Analysts’ Recommendations Evolution (4 months), and Analysts’ buy/sell recommendations. The company must be covered by at least 4 of these 6 ratings for the calculation to be performed. We recommend that you carefully review the associated descriptions. |
|||
|
|
Analysts’ buy/sell recommendations This rating is based on analysts’ recommendations regarding the company (i.e., whether they advise to buy, accumulate (outperform), hold, reduce (underperform), or sell shares). The rating reflects the overall consensus among analysts and takes into account the number of recommendations received. A positive consensus expressed by a large number of analysts results in a higher rating. |
|||
|
|
Analysts’ recommendations evolution (1 year) This rating is based on the changes in the analysts’ recommendations rating over the past 12 months. The goal is to identify companies for which the analysts’ consensus has varied the most. Recent positive revisions result in a higher rating. |
|||
|
|
Analysts’ recommendations evolution (4 months) This rating is based on the changes in the analysts’ recommendations rating over the past 4 months. The goal is to identify companies for which the analysts’ consensus has varied the most. Recent positive revisions result in a higher rating. |
|||
|
|
Analysts’ target price This rating is based on the distance (expressed as a percentage) between the company’s latest known share price and the average target price set by analysts responsible for evaluating the company at leading global financial institutions. Naturally, a higher average target price relative to the current share price results in a better rating. |
|||
|
|
Analysts’ target price evolution (1 year) This rating is based on the changes in the average target price set by analysts responsible for evaluating the company at leading global financial institutions. The target price is a metric defined over a 12-month horizon and is subject to revisions. Naturally, any single analyst’s updated estimate affects the average, so revisions to the average target price are frequent. Recent upward revisions lead to a higher rating. This rating focuses specifically on the evolution of target price estimates over the past 12 months. |
|||
|
|
Analysts’ target price evolution (4 months) This rating is based on the changes in the average target price set by analysts responsible for evaluating the company at leading global financial institutions. The target price is a metric defined over a 12-month horizon and is subject to revisions. Naturally, any single analyst’s updated estimate affects the average, so revisions to the average target price are frequent. Recent upward revisions lead to a higher rating. This rating focuses specifically on the evolution of target price estimates over the past 4 months. |
|
Analysts’ recommendations evolution (7 days) |
Analysts’ recommendations evolution (7 days) This rating is based on the changes in the analysts’ recommendations rating over the past 7 days. The goal is to identify companies for which the analysts’ consensus has varied the most. Extremely recent positive revisions result in a higher rating. |
|||
|
Target Price evolution (7 days) |
Target Price evolution (7 days) This rating is based on the changes in the average target price set by analysts responsible for evaluating the company at leading global financial institutions. The target price is a metric defined over a 12-month horizon and is subject to revisions. Naturally, any single analyst’s updated estimate affects the average, so revisions to the average target price are frequent. Extremely recent upward revisions lead to a higher rating. This rating focuses specifically on the evolution of target price estimates over the past 7 days. |
More ratings”
data-not-collapsed=” Fewer ratings”
> More ratings
| Power Metallic Mines Inc. | Sector | Germany | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Visibility |
Visibility This composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings based on the following ratings: Surprise rates, Analysts’ Coverage, Financial Estimates Divergence, Analysts’ Recommendations Divergence, and Analysts’ Target Price Divergence. The company must be covered by at least 4 of these 5 ratings for the calculation to be performed. We recommend that you carefully review the associated descriptions. |
|||
|
|
Analysts’ coverage This rating is based on the number of estimates provided regarding the company’s future business performance. A company followed by a larger number of analyst firms receives a higher rating. Naturally, the larger the company, the more analysts typically cover it. |
|||
|
|
Financial estimates divergence This rating is based on the estimates made by analysts responsible for producing the company’s financial forecasts at leading global financial institutions. The lower the dispersion in estimates for the accounting items to be published over the next three years, the higher the rating. Accounting items considered include: Revenue, EBITDA, EBIT, Pre-tax Income, Net Income, Earnings Per Share (EPS), and Dividend Per Share. |
|||
|
|
Analysts’ recommendations divergence This rating is based on analysts’ recommendations regarding the company (i.e., whether they advise to buy, accumulate, hold, reduce, or sell shares). The rating reflects the level of divergence in analysts’ opinions. A lower divergence of opinion results in a higher rating. |
|||
|
|
Analysts’ Target price divergence This rating is based on the target prices set by analysts responsible for evaluating the company at leading global financial institutions. The target price is a metric defined over a 12-month horizon and is subject to revisions. While the average target price is typically presented, it’s important to understand that several analysts provide their individual assessments. The lower the dispersion in these target price estimates, the higher the rating. |
|||
|
|
Surprise rates This rating is based on surprise rates from the last four completed fiscal periods. A surprise rate measures the difference between the consensus (average estimated value by the analysts covering the company) of an accounting item the day before publication and the actual value reported by the company on the publication day. A company that reports results above consensus receives a higher rating. Accounting items considered include: Revenue, EBIT, Net Income, and Earnings Per Share (EPS). |
– |
| Power Metallic Mines Inc. | Sector | Germany | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Financial revisions |
Financial revisions This composite rating is the result of an average of the rankings according to the Revenue revisions (1 year), Revenue revisions (4 months), EPS revisions (1 year), EPS revisions (4 months) ratings. The company must be covered by the four ratings for the calculation to be performed. We recommend that you read the associated descriptions carefully. |
– | ||
|
|
Revenue revisions (1 year) This rating is based on the evolution of the company’s revenue estimates for the next three fiscal years. These revenue targets are set by analysts responsible for the financial outlook of the company at the world’s largest financial institutions and may be revised at any time. Recent positive revisions, which reflect increased analyst confidence in the company’s ability to generate higher future revenues, lead to a better rating. Conversely, downward revisions can signal potential growth issues or unfavorable market conditions. The focus here is on estimate revisions made over the last 12 months. |
– | ||
|
|
Revenue revisions (4 months) This rating is based on the evolution of the company’s revenue estimates for the next three fiscal years. These revenue targets are set by analysts responsible for the financial outlook of the company at the world’s largest financial institutions and may be revised at any time. Recent positive revisions, which reflect increased analyst confidence in the company’s ability to generate higher future revenues, lead to a better rating. Conversely, downward revisions can signal potential growth issues or unfavorable market conditions. The focus here is on estimate revisions made over the last 4 months. In the short term, the 4-month revision rating is essential for assessing quick adjustments, which may result from quarterly announcements, strategic updates, or external shocks temporarily impacting the perception of future revenues. |
– | ||
|
|
EPS revisions (1 year) This rating is based on the evolution of the company’s EPS estimates for the next three fiscal years. These EPS targets are set by analysts responsible for the financial outlook of the company at the world’s largest financial institutions and may be revised at any time. Recent positive revisions, often reflecting improving profitability and sound operational management, lead to a higher rating. Conversely, downward adjustments may signal concerns about profitability or exceptional expenses. The focus here is on estimate revisions made over the last 12 months. |
– | ||
|
|
EPS revisions (4 months) This rating is based on the evolution of the company’s EPS estimates for the next three fiscal years. These EPS targets are set by analysts responsible for the financial outlook of the company at the world’s largest financial institutions and may be revised at any time. Recent positive revisions, often reflecting improving profitability and sound operational management, lead to a higher rating. Conversely, downward adjustments may signal concerns about profitability or exceptional expenses. The focus here is on estimate revisions made over the last 4 months. |
– |
|
EPS revisions (7 days) |
EPS revisions (7 days) This rating is based on changes in the company’s earnings per share (EPS) estimates for the next three financial years. These EPS targets are set by analysts responsible for the company’s financial outlook at leading global financial institutions and can be revised at any time. Recent positive revisions, often signaling growing profitability and effective operational management, result in a higher rating. Conversely, downward adjustments may indicate concerns about profitability or exceptional expenses. This rating specifically focuses on revisions made during the past 7 days. |
– | ||
|
Revenue revisions (7 days) |
Revenue revisions (7 days) This rating is based on changes in the company’s revenue estimates for the next three financial years. These target revenues are set by analysts responsible for the company’s financial outlook at leading global financial institutions and can be revised at any time. Recent positive revisions, indicating increased analyst confidence in the company’s ability to generate higher future revenues, result in a higher rating. Conversely, downward revisions may signal potential growth challenges or unfavorable market conditions. This rating specifically focuses on revisions made during the past 7 days. |
– |
More ratings”
data-not-collapsed=” Fewer ratings”
> More ratings
Select your edition
All financial news and data tailored to specific country editions
