Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: SATS stock price vs WY: inconclusive Relative valuation is incomplete for this pair. Review the available filing metrics before drawing a conclusion.
Quick read
Each company valued on the other's multiple, then compared with the market price.
Implied fair value · at WY's multiple
Needs Revenue / share, WY P/S.
Implied fair value · at SATS's multiple
Needs SATS P/S.
Price unavailable
Metric by metric
Where each company leads, and how wide the gap is.
Growth lag
Reported gross margin
Operating income + D&A
Lower is better
Not comparable
Lower leverage
Statements
Annual statements in reported currencies, with calculations and source evidence.
Values retain reported currencies and share bases. Select a figure to inspect its period, calculation and filing inputs. Differences require compatible units and periods.
Explore enterprise value and market valuation multiples in the valuation sections.
Trendline
Eight period-end years of reported revenue, earnings, and margins. Periods and currencies are shown with the data.
Price framework
USD market cap plus reported borrowing debt, less cash and equivalents. This EV proxy excludes investments, preferred stock and noncontrolling-interest adjustments.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Price framework
The same filing-backed model used on each company's valuation page, with company-specific inputs and calculated scenarios.
EchoStar Corporation · implied price per share
Latest annual free cash flow must be positive to qualify the filing-backed baseline.
WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY · implied price per share
Five annual free-cash-flow observations are required for the filing-backed baseline.
Balance sheet health
Inspect reported liquidity and leverage alongside historical financial-health checks.
Financial strength on a 0–9 scale.
Bankruptcy-risk signal from balance sheet and earnings power.
Not enough data to score either balance sheet.
Comparable set
Where the pair sits against the wider comparable set.
Keep comparing
Open adjacent comparisons from the same industry to pressure-test the read across multiple pairs.
AT&T INC.
SATS vs T
Clearfield, Inc.
SATS vs CLFD
T-Mobile US, Inc.
SATS vs TMUS
COMCAST CORP
SATS vs CMCSA
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC
SATS vs VZ
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. /MO/
SATS vs CHTR
RAYONIER INC
SATS vs RYN
POTLATCHDELTIC CORP
SATS vs PCH
INTERNATIONAL PAPER CO /NEW/
SATS vs IP
UFP INDUSTRIES INC
SATS vs UFPI
VORNADO REALTY TRUST
SATS vs VNO
COSTAR GROUP, INC.
SATS vs CSGP
Cash excludes investments. EBITDA is an operating-income-plus-D&A proxy. Missing borrowing categories remain unavailable; select a value to inspect its inputs.
LLM-powered synthesis
An explanation of the financial evidence. Check its snapshot date against the figures above.
This explanation uses an earlier data snapshot or evidence version. Review its generation date and the current figures, or refresh after signing in.
If you believe SATS can materially improve margins, stabilize revenue, and reduce distress risk, then a contrarian long may be warranted because the stock trades at just 0.4x P/S and sits inside its historical range; otherwise, the weak profitability and quality metrics argue against relying on the apparent 18.7% valuation upside.
The comparison shows a large valuation mismatch: SATS trades at 0.4x P/S versus WY at 2.6x, yet SATS has deeply negative margins and returns while WY is profitable. The stated implied price of $135.44 versus the current $114.10 suggests 18.7% upside on the P/S framework, but that multiple appears hard to justify given the operating profile.
Supporting Metrics
