Skip to main content

Featured Post

Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park infographics: what's built/what's coming/what's missing, who's responsible, + project FAQ/timeline (pinned post)

For Greenland, a setback in the Forbes Global 2000 ranking, which uses broader metrics than Fortune

Last August I wrote how Greenland Holding Group (aka Greenland Holdings Group) had risen to 307 in Forbes magazine's Global 2000 listing, after oscillating between 320 and 341 over the previous four years.

Well, this year represents a setback, to 372. That contrast with Greenland's steady rise on the Fortune Global 500 ranking, noted yesterday, to 142. 

The two rankings are not the same. Forbes bases its assessment on four broad metrics: a composite score assessing sales (revenue), profits, assets, and market value. The better-known Fortune ranking relies solely on revenue in the past fiscal year.

Sales ahead of profits

Forbes, in its summary, noted that favorable interest rates have lifted the global stock market, which means that, while sales and profits may be down, companies' total assets and market value have risen.

That partly applies to Greenland. As shown in the screenshot below, the company's revenue and assets continue to grow, but its profits have diminished. So, while it ranks 110 in sales and 188 in assets, it ranks 516 in profit.

Greenland's market cap is $10.4 billion, or 1646 in market value, as of Forbes's assessment. That's a higher market cap than last year's $9.8 billion--but a lower ranking than last year's 1198. That relates to a decline in the company's stock, recently below 4.5 yuan, barely half the value of the peaks in 2016 and 2018.
Graphic from Forbes


As noted in the below graphic, which shows the divergence between sales and market value, Greenland is no longer considered to be a "growth champion." In the bottom half of the graphic, which on the Forbes website is interactive, the most recent year is in yellow, on the left.

Graphic from Forbes

Comments