Home Compare ALLN.SW vs MOBN.SW
Stock Comparison · Industry comparison · Real Estate Services

Allreal Holding vs Mobimo Holding: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

Mobimo holds the cleaner structural position, with growth as the main driver and profitability adding further support. Allreal does not offset that deficit through any equally strong structural edge elsewhere. The market setup is currently leaning toward Allreal, which does not confirm the structural lead. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Mobimo, but the market is not currently confirming it.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Both peer scores are relative to the STOXX 600 universe, making them directly comparable.

Updated 2026-07-05

The clearest separation starts in growth, with profitability adding a second layer of support. Mobimo Holding AG leads by 18 points on the overall comparison score.

INDUSTRY COMPARISON

Both operate in: Real Estate Services

This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. ALLN.SW and MOBN.SW share the same industry classification.

For a similarity-based comparison, see how Allreal and Mobimo each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.

Peer-Relative Score
ALLN.SW
Allreal Holding AG
59
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: STOXX 600
vs
MOBN.SW
Mobimo Holding AG
77
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: STOXX 600

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.

Dimension spread: ALLN.SW vs MOBN.SW Profitability 41 62 Stability 85 83 Valuation 77 83 Growth 32 84 ALLN.SW MOBN.SW
Gap Ranking
#1 Growth +52
#2 Profitability +21
#3 Valuation +6
#4 Stability +2
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for ALLN.SW and MOBN.SW Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer ALLN.SWMOBN.SW Relative valuation Structural strength

Mobimo Holding AG looks stronger on relative valuation, while the broader price setup remains mixed.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

Entry today — historical context

Where ALLN.SW and MOBN.SW each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.

BASED ON 5-YEAR HISTORY ALLN.SW Elevated · near norm 0th 50th 100th 4 pct gap MOBN.SW Elevated · below norm 0th 50th 100th 95th 90th
ALLN.SW (95th percentile) and MOBN.SW (90th percentile) both sit in the upper portion of their own 5-year ranges. The historical entry context is broadly similar for both. This reflects entry timing, not which company is structurally stronger.

Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Growth
Mobimo Holding AG ranks near the top of the group on growth; Allreal Holding AG sits in the weaker half.
Profitability
On profitability, the edge still sits with Mobimo Holding AG, even though both profiles look solid.
Growth — Dominant Gap
ALLN.SW
32
MOBN.SW
84
Gap+52in favour of MOBN.SW

Revenue growth reinforces the category-level growth lead.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Stability is the one area where Allreal Holding AG still pushes back materially — it is the steadier name on this dimension, which keeps the result from reading as one-way.

What this means for the comparison

Growth is the clearest driver, and profitability also supports Mobimo Holding AG's broader structural position.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the ALLN.SW vs MOBN.SW comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Similar growth-driven comparisons

Explore how ALLN.SW and MOBN.SW 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.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

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.

Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.

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.