Home Compare ITRK.L vs UMG.AS
Stock Comparison · Single-driver result

Intertek Group vs Universal Music Group N.V.: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

The structural profiles are close, with Universal Music carrying a narrow edge on growth. Intertek still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. Both sides have seen trend damage — neither carries a clear market edge right now. With both trends damaged, the structural comparison carries most of the weight here.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.

Updated 2026-04-05

Growth points more clearly toward Intertek Group plc, even if the broader score still leans toward Universal Music Group N.V..

Trajectory Similarity
0.74
Similar
Peer-set rank: #9
within Universal Music Group N.V.'s functional peer set

These two companies are linked by measured long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.

The pair sits on a clearly comparable long-term path, though it is not a near-twin match.

The strongest overlap appears in revenue stability and capital structure.

Similarity drivers
revenue stabilitycapital structure
How to read the score
0.85–1.00 · Very similar0.70–0.84 · Similar0.55–0.69 · Moderately similarbelow 0.55 · Loose match
Peer-Relative Score
ITRK.L
Intertek Group plc
56
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
vs
UMG.AS
Universal Music Group N.V.
57
Peer-Score
Signal qualityHigh

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

The clearest separation appears in growth.

Dimension spread: ITRK.L vs UMG.AS Profitability 57 69 Stability 33 63 Valuation 73 66 Growth 52 20 ITRK.L UMG.AS
Gap Ranking
#1 Growth +32
#2 Stability +30
#3 Profitability +12
#4 Valuation +7
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for ITRK.L and UMG.AS Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer ITRK.LUMG.AS Relative valuation Structural strength

The structural gap is limited here, but current pricing still leans against Universal Music Group N.V..

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

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Growth
Intertek Group plc sits in the stronger part of the group on growth, while Universal Music Group N.V. is closer to mid-pack.
Stability
On stability, Universal Music Group N.V. is positioned higher in the group, while Intertek Group plc is closer to the middle.
Growth — Dominant Gap
ITRK.L
52
UMG.AS
20
Gap+32in favour of ITRK.L

The current lead is backed by a stronger multi-year growth trajectory.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Intertek Group plc still shows lower market-fundamental divergence, which keeps the wider picture mixed rather than completely one-sided.

What this means for the comparison

Growth is the clearest driver of the lead, with stability adding further support — though growth still provides a real counterweight.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the ITRK.L vs UMG.AS comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Other comparisons with conflicting dimension signals

Explore how ITRK.L and UMG.AS 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.

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.