1925 vs CRBJY: DAIWA HOUSE INDUSTRY CO.,LTD. vs China Resources Land Ltd ADR
Side-by-side comparison of key financial metrics, valuation ratios, profitability, growth, and risk-adjusted returns. Both companies are in the Real Estate sector.
1925•Tokyo Stock Exchange
¥4,852.00
-1.36%
CRBJY•United States
$39.45
+0.00%
Quick Summary
DAIWA HOUSE INDUSTRY CO.,LTD. is 118.3× the market cap of China Resources Land Ltd ADR. CRBJY pays a dividend; 1925 does not.
Price & Performance
| Metric | 1925 | CRBJY |
|---|---|---|
| Current Price | ¥4,852.00 | $39.45 |
| Daily Change | -1.36% | 0.00% |
| 1-Year Return | -4.80% | 14.19% |
| 52-Week High | ¥5,710.00 | $40.25 |
| 52-Week Low | ¥4,763.31 | $32.78 |
| 50-Day MA | — | $36.07 |
| 200-Day MA | — | $36.47 |
| Beta | — | 0.60 |
Size & Revenue
| Metric | 1925 | CRBJY |
|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $3.26T | $27.59B |
| Enterprise Value | — | $50.89B |
| Revenue (TTM) | — | $294.53B |
| Shares Outstanding | — | 713.09M |
| Float | — | 2.88B |
| Employees | — | 60,740 |
Valuation
| Metric | 1925 | CRBJY |
|---|---|---|
| Trailing P/E | — | 6.71 |
| Forward P/E | — | 5.77 |
| PEG Ratio | — | 0.62 |
| Price / Sales | — | 0.09 |
| Price / Book | — | 0.66 |
| EV / EBITDA | — | 5.54 |
Profitability
| Metric | 1925 | CRBJY |
|---|---|---|
| Profit Margin | — | 9.25% |
| Operating Margin (TTM) | — | 18.97% |
| Return on Equity | — | 8.91% |
| Return on Assets | — | 2.72% |
| Diluted EPS (TTM) | — | 5.58 |
Growth
| Metric | 1925 | CRBJY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth (YoY) | — | 19.90% |
| Earnings Growth (YoY) | — | 16.20% |
Dividends
| Metric | 1925 | CRBJY |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | 3.52% |
| Dividend / Share | — | 1.32 |
Risk-Adjusted Returns & Quality
| Metric | 1925 | CRBJY |
|---|---|---|
| Sortino (Composite) | -1.59 | 0.21 |
| Sharpe (Composite) | -1.32 | 1.71 |
| Calmar (Composite) | -4.41 | 0.35 |
| Hurst Exponent | 0.5586 | 0.4719 |
| Piotroski F-Score | — | 6/9 |
| Magic Formula Rank | — | #8,915 |
Ownership
| Metric | 1925 | CRBJY |
|---|---|---|
| % Insiders | — | 0.00% |
| % Institutions | — | 0.00% |
Compare 1925 to peers
Compare CRBJY to peers
Green highlighting indicates the more favorable value for each metric. Data is for informational purposes only and may be delayed.