The structural profiles are close, with RELX carrying a narrow edge on profitability. ISS A/S still leads on valuation and stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, ISS A/S carries the stronger setup — intact trend against RELX's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with RELX, 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 profitability, with growth adding a second layer of support.
Both operate in: Specialty Business Services
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. ISS.CO and REL.L share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how ISS A/S and RELX each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
RELX PLC occupies the cheaper side of the setup map, although ISS A/S still holds the stronger structural profile.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The profitability lead is mainly driven by a 26-point operating margin advantage.
Absolute pricing still looks more supportive for ISS A/S, with a forward P/E that is 4.8 turns lower there.
Profitability points more clearly to RELX PLC, but valuation and current pricing keep the broader result mixed.
Break down the ISS.CO vs REL.L comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how ISS.CO and REL.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.