Worthington Competitors
| Z2J Stock | 26.80 -0.91 -3.28% |
Worthington Steel, and Tokyu Construction Correlation Overview
Poor diversification
For the present investment horizon, the measured correlation between Z2J and TCW stands at 0.63, or Poor diversification. The cleaner interpretation is to review correlation beside volatility, expected return, and the role each holding plays in the portfolio.
Moving together with Worthington Stock
| 0.8 | 9TO | Toyota Tsusho | PairCorr |
| 0.83 | ARRJ | ArcelorMittal | PairCorr |
| 0.82 | ARRD | ArcelorMittal SA | PairCorr |
| 0.83 | NUO | Nucor Corp | PairCorr |
| 0.82 | SD5 | Steel Dynamics | PairCorr |
Moving against Worthington Stock
Mean reversion opportunities in Worthington Steel,'s arise when market prices disconnect from fundamental anchors such as earnings, book value, or historical price-to-earnings multiples.
Worthington Steel, Competition Correlation Matrix
Correlation analysis between Worthington Steel 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
| High negative correlations
|
Risk-Adjusted Indicators
There is a big difference between Worthington Stock performing well and Worthington Steel, 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 Worthington Steel,'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.| Mean Deviation | Jensen Alpha | Sortino Ratio | Treynor Ratio | Semi Deviation | Expected Shortfall | Potential Upside | Value @Risk | Maximum Drawdown | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AY5 | 1.05 | 0.03 | 0.04 | -0.23 | 1.23 | 2.60 | 7.55 | |||
| 9ZY | 3.61 | 0.07 | 0.03 | -0.09 | 4.44 | 8.43 | 27.18 | |||
| BH5 | 1.52 | 0.41 | 0.24 | 1.15 | 1.37 | 3.51 | 22.56 | |||
| XC5 | 2.20 | -0.28 | 0.00 | 0.56 | 0.00 | 6.92 | 25.50 | |||
| WCE | 2.27 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.11 | 3.83 | 4.77 | 21.36 | |||
| CQY | 2.59 | 0.32 | 0.09 | 0.38 | 3.15 | 6.67 | 23.67 | |||
| 4KH | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||
| TCW | 1.82 | 0.26 | 0.11 | -2.64 | 2.38 | 5.00 | 19.22 |
Worthington Steel, Competitive Analysis
Within its peer group that includes ALGOMA STEEL, BlueScope Steel, and Beauty Farm, Worthington Steel, stands out in several ways. The company commands a 1.48 B market valuation built on 3.09 B in annual revenue. Shareholders see a 10.52% return on equity, supported by a 3.83% profit margin. Worthington Steel, keeps more of each revenue dollar with a 3.83% margin versus -47.22% at ALGOMA STEEL. Top-line revenue favors BlueScope Steel by a wide margin: 16.25 B to 3.09 B. On equity returns, Beauty Farm earns 33.02% compared to 10.52% at Worthington Steel,.| Better Than Average | Worse Than Peers | View Performance Chart |
Peer Performance Charts
How to Analyze Worthington Steel, Against Peers
Worthington Steel,'s peer analysis compares Worthington Steel, 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 Worthington Steel, 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 Worthington Steel, leads or lags and what catalysts could close or widen the gap.