Deere mpany holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across valuation and stability. Holcim still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup broadly confirms the structural lead — Deere mpany holds the more constructive position. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — Deere mpany's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
This is not just a one-metric split: both valuation and stability materially support the lead. The overall score gap is 19 points in favour of Deere & Company.
These two companies are linked by measured long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
This level of similarity points to a meaningful structural match, though not a tight one.
The clearest structural overlap shows up in revenue stability.
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.
Deere & Company looks stronger on relative valuation, while the broader price setup remains mixed.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The multiple-based pricing edge comes from a trailing P/E that is 64 turns lower.
Earnings growth also leans the other way, which keeps the score lead from reading as a full growth sweep.
The lead is built on both valuation and stability — though growth still provides a counterweight.
Break down the DE vs HOLN.SW comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how DE and HOLN.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.
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.