Konecranes holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across growth and profitability. Nordex SE still leads on growth and stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, Nordex SE carries the stronger setup — intact trend against Konecranes's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Konecranes, 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.
The page question resolves through growth, where Nordex SE holds the stronger read even though the broader score still favours Konecranes Plc.
This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
This level of similarity signals a strong structural match, even though some dimensions still separate the two companies.
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.
Score differences across key dimensions.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Nordex SE is cheaper, but Konecranes Plc is still stronger.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Where KCR.HE and NDX1.DE each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.
Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.
The main growth separation is very wide, driven by a meaningfully stronger expansion profile.
On the market side, Nordex SE carries the stronger trend while Konecranes's trend has broken — the market setup does not confirm the structural advantage.
The lead is built on both growth and profitability — though growth still provides a counterweight.
Break down the KCR.HE vs NDX1.DE comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how KCR.HE and NDX1.DE 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.