Scout Competitors

SCOUT Stock  SEK 0.13  0.01  8.33%   
The company operates in the Electronic Gaming & Multimedia industry (Technology sector). Peers for Scout Gaming Group include Fragbite Group, JLT Mobile, MOBA Network, Gasporox, and ChargePanel and others in the group. This provides context for comparative analysis. Use this module to test if Scout Gaming has durable advantages versus sector peers.

Pair Correlation for Scout Gaming and Nitro Games Overview

Good diversification

Across the chosen horizon, SCOUT and NITRO show a correlation of -0.01 and fall into the Good diversification bucket. The overlap area represents the portion of risk that may be diversified away when both instruments are held together and nothing else in the portfolio changes.

Moving against Scout Stock

  0.63BIOEX Bioextrax ABPairCorr
  0.58TELIA Telia CompanyPairCorr
  0.52ERIC-A TelefonaktiebolagetPairCorr
  0.44VOLV-B AB VolvoPairCorr
  0.44HM-B H M HennesPairCorr
Mean reversion in Scout Gaming is more reliable over longer time horizons. Short-term deviations can persist and even widen before correcting, making position sizing and risk management critical.
Hype
Prediction
LowEstimatedHigh
0.010.136.78
Details
Intrinsic
Valuation
LowRealHigh
0.010.116.76
Details
Naive
Forecast
LowNextHigh
0.00250.126.77
Details
Bollinger
Band Projection (param)
LowerMiddle BandUpper
0.110.130.14
Details
Effective investment decisions about Scout Gaming require competitive context. Benchmarking Scout Gaming's against peers on earnings quality, growth consistency, and balance sheet strength can materially change the investment conclusion.

Scout Gaming Competition Correlation Matrix

Correlation analysis between Scout Gaming Group and its competitors helps investors understand whether diversification is real or only superficial inside the same peer group. This matrix is most informative when investors want to know whether adding another peer would improve diversification, increase crowding, or leave total risk largely unchanged.

High positive correlations

GPXJLT
SONEJLT
SONEFRAG
SPEONEFLOWS
FLOWSMOBA
JLTFRAG
  

High negative correlations

SONEMOBA
MOBAJLT
NITROMOBA
SONEFLOWS
GPXMOBA
NITROANOT

Risk-Adjusted Indicators

There is a big difference between Scout Stock performing well and Scout Gaming Company doing well as a business compared to the competition. There are so many exceptions to the norm that investors cannot definitively determine what's good or bad unless they analyze Scout Gaming's multiple risk-adjusted performance indicators across the competitive landscape. These indicators are quantitative in nature and help investors forecast volatility and risk-adjusted expected returns across various positions.

Scout Gaming Competitive Analysis

How does Scout Gaming measure up against Fragbite Group, JLT Mobile, and MOBA Network? The financials tell a nuanced story. Scout Gaming operates at a 110.8 M scale with 31.8 M flowing through the income statement. With a -94.83% return on equity and -260.74% net margin, Scout Gaming faces a more difficult earnings environment than some peers. Fragbite Group keeps more of each revenue dollar with a -35.77% margin versus -260.74% at Scout Gaming. On equity returns, JLT Mobile earns 7.63% compared to -94.83% at Scout Gaming. Scout Gaming is dwarfed by MOBA Network on market cap at 460.5 M versus 110.8 M.
    
 Better Than Average     
    
 Worse Than Peers    View Performance Chart
SCOUT FRAG JLT MOBA ANOT FLOWS GPX CHARGE SONE SPEONE
 8.33 
0.13
Scout
 6.51 
7.20
Fragbite
 0.64 
1.57
JLT
 2.50 
0.78
MOBA
 6.29 
0.05
Anoto
 2.05 
2.99
Flowscape
 1.19 
6.80
Gasporox
 0.68 
1.47
ChargePanel
 7.14 
5.20
Sonetel
 5.88 
0.16
Spectrumone
Market Volatility
(90 Days Market Risk)
Market Performance
(90 Days Performance)
Odds of Financial Distress
(Probability Of Bankruptcy)
Current Valuation
(Equity Enterprise Value)
Buy or Sell Analysis
(Average Analysts Consensus)
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Trade Advice
(90 Days Macroaxis Advice)
Current Ratio
Net Asset
Profit Margin
EBITDA
Operating Margin
Current Valuation
Price To Book
Current Asset
Five Year Return
Beta
Number Of Employees
Shares Outstanding
Cash Flow From Operations
Annual Yield
Total Debt
Return On Equity
Z Score
Return On Asset
Book Value Per Share
Current Liabilities
Total Asset
Target Price
Debt To Equity
Shares Owned By Institutions
Market Capitalization
Price To Earning
Price To Sales
Net Income
Earnings Per Share
Shares Owned By Insiders
Revenue
Working Capital
Cash And Equivalents
Cash Per Share
Gross Profit
Day Typical Price
Accumulation Distribution
Market Facilitation Index
Daily Balance Of Power
Period Momentum Indicator
Rate Of Daily Change
Day Median Price
Price Action Indicator
Relative Strength Index
Coefficient Of Variation
Mean Deviation
Jensen Alpha
Total Risk Alpha
Sortino Ratio
Downside Variance
Standard Deviation
Kurtosis
Potential Upside
Treynor Ratio
Maximum Drawdown
Variance
Market Risk Adjusted Performance
Risk Adjusted Performance
Skewness
Semi Deviation
Information Ratio
Value At Risk
Expected Short fall
Downside Deviation
Semi Variance

Peer Performance Charts

How to Analyze Scout Gaming Against Peers

Scout Gaming's peer analysis compares Scout Gaming with related companies to put valuation, quality, and risk metrics in context. This helps determine whether recent performance is company-specific or broadly sector-driven. A practical workflow includes:
  • Set a relevant peer group: Include direct competitors and close alternatives with comparable business exposure.
  • Benchmark core financials: Compare profitability, growth, capital structure, and cash flow quality.
  • Check valuation dispersion: Review whether Scout Gaming trades at a premium or discount versus peers and why.
  • Evaluate risk profile: Compare volatility, drawdowns, and correlation to avoid false diversification assumptions.
  • Document the thesis: Record where Scout Gaming leads or lags and what catalysts could close or widen the gap.
Use this as an educational baseline, then validate conclusions with current filings, market conditions, and portfolio objectives.