Generates electricity through various sources, including renewable and traditional methods. Transmits electricity over high-voltage power lines to distribution networks. Now — the numbers.
The biggest line carries real weight, but it doesn’t decide everything on its own.
This is an established company with proven profits.
Average growth of 10% a year over the last 4 years. Every year shown ended in profit.
The gap is $15.3B. In times of high interest rates, a gap like that can squeeze a company.
We compared this company with its own sector across five subjects.
A score of 50 means class average.
Clearly below the class average.
Clearly below the class average.
The price isn’t cheap next to earnings — that’s why this grade sits in the middle.
There is growth, but not at top-of-the-class tempo.
The price is looking for direction — no strong breakout, no collapse.
Financial Strength: The cash-and-debt balance is thin; the buffer for hard times is slim.
Business Quality: Profit power and business quality trail similar companies in the sector.
The stock trades below its recent peak — about 11% off the top. A pullback, not a collapse.
Over the last 4 years, sales grew about 10% a year on average.
It pays out $2.12 per share each year — regular cash for whoever holds the stock.
The balance sheet offers little cushion against a rough stretch. Report-card grade: 25/100.
Measured against its sector, the quality of the business sits below the class average. Report-card grade: 28/100.
On our five-subject report card, EMA sits behind the class. A low grade doesn’t mean “doomed” — it means “big claim, small proof.”
The takeaway: EMA does earn real profits — but on our report card it still sits behind its class. The real debate isn’t the quality of the business — it’s what that quality should cost.