601326 vs MIHDF: Qinhuangdao Port Co Ltd vs MISC Berhad
Side-by-side comparison of key financial metrics, valuation ratios, profitability, growth, and risk-adjusted returns. Both companies are in the Industrials sector.
60
601326•SHG
CN¥3.55
-0.56%
MI
MIHDF•United States
N/A
Quick Summary
Qinhuangdao Port Co Ltd is 3.0× the market cap of MISC Berhad. 601326 trades at a lower P/E than MIHDF. 601326 pays a dividend; MIHDF does not.
Price & Performance
| Metric | 601326 | MIHDF |
|---|---|---|
| Current Price | CN¥3.55 | — |
| Daily Change | -0.56% | — |
| 1-Year Return | 11.64% | — |
| 52-Week High | CN¥3.95 | — |
| 52-Week Low | CN¥3.17 | — |
| 50-Day MA | CN¥3.58 | — |
| 200-Day MA | CN¥3.52 | — |
| Beta | 0.50 | 0.03 |
Size & Revenue
| Metric | 601326 | MIHDF |
|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $19.72B | $6.47B |
| Enterprise Value | $19.68B | $15.24B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.99B | $11.15B |
| Shares Outstanding | 4.76B | 4.46B |
| Float | 1.07B | 2.00B |
| Employees | 8,348 | — |
Valuation
| Metric | 601326 | MIHDF |
|---|---|---|
| Trailing P/E | 12.17 | 14.50 |
| Forward P/E | 0.00 | — |
| Price / Sales | 2.82 | 0.58 |
| Price / Book | 0.98 | 0.77 |
| EV / EBITDA | 9.33 | 3.17 |
Profitability
| Metric | 601326 | MIHDF |
|---|---|---|
| Profit Margin | 22.99% | 15.25% |
| Operating Margin (TTM) | 12.34% | 25.96% |
| Return on Equity | 7.96% | 4.76% |
| Return on Assets | 3.65% | 3.06% |
| Diluted EPS (TTM) | 0.29 | 0.10 |
Growth
| Metric | 601326 | MIHDF |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth (YoY) | -1.20% | -15.00% |
| Earnings Growth (YoY) | -5.30% | — |
Dividends
| Metric | 601326 | MIHDF |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | 3.22% | — |
| Dividend / Share | 0.12 | — |
Risk-Adjusted Returns & Quality
| Metric | 601326 | MIHDF |
|---|---|---|
| Sortino (Composite) | -0.16 | — |
| Sharpe (Composite) | -0.22 | — |
| Calmar (Composite) | -2.16 | — |
| Hurst Exponent | 0.4469 | — |
| Piotroski F-Score | 8/9 | — |
| Magic Formula Rank | #14,031 | — |
Ownership
| Metric | 601326 | MIHDF |
|---|---|---|
| % Insiders | 8449.70% | 54.46% |
| % Institutions | 95.50% | 37.67% |
Compare 601326 to peers
Compare MIHDF to peers
Green highlighting indicates the more favorable value for each metric. Data is for informational purposes only and may be delayed.