The structural profiles are close, with Iberdrola, carrying a narrow edge on growth. Telia Company AB (publ) still has the edge on profitability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, Telia Company AB (publ) carries the stronger setup — intact trend against Iberdrola,'s broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Iberdrola,, 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.
Most of the separation is still concentrated in growth.
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 investment intensity and recent revenue growth.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The clearest separation appears in growth.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Structure stays fairly close here, while current pricing still looks more supportive for Iberdrola, S.A..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Earnings growth is one contributing factor within the growth lead.
Profitability still leans toward Telia Company AB (publ), so the lead is real without reading as one-way.
Growth is the clearest driver of the lead, with profitability adding further support — though profitability still provides a real counterweight.
Break down the IBE.MC vs TELIA.ST comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how IBE.MC and TELIA.ST 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.
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.