3i Ord holds the cleaner structural position, with valuation as the main driver and profitability adding further support. Quilter still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup is currently leaning toward Quilter, which does not confirm the structural lead. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with 3i Ord, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
The clearest separation starts in valuation, but profitability adds another real layer to the result. The overall score gap is 10 points in favour of 3i Group Ord.
This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
The pair shares a valid long-term profile match, but the trajectories are not especially close.
The match is driven mainly by investment intensity and margin consistency.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
Score differences across key dimensions.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
3i Group Ord and Quilter plc look relatively close on structure, but the price setup still leans toward 3i Group Ord.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The multiple-based pricing edge comes from a forward P/E that is 7.9 turns lower.
Growth still leans toward Quilter plc, so the lead is real without reading as one-way.
Valuation is the clearest driver of the lead, with profitability adding further support — though growth still provides a real counterweight.
Break down the III.L vs QLT.L comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how III.L and QLT.L each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.