COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
KT vs KYIV
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. KT scored 33.8, KYIV scored 68.5 — KYIV leads.
Compare another set
KT
KT Corporation
33.8
$19.60 · $9.3B
Score gap
34.7
KYIV leads
KYIV
Kyivstar Group Ltd.
68.5
$13.61 · $3.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestKT10.2x
- Fastest growthKYIV+25.9%
- Strongest balance sheetKYIV0.39
- Highest qualityKYIV68 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueKYIV-52%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
KT
stronger →← stronger
KYIV
46
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
68
43
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
88
27
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
54
KYIV is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
KT
KYIV
$1.3bC+
FCF
$311mC
+0.4%C
Rev
+25.9%A-
0.62B
D/E
0.39B+
10.2xA-
P/E
20.0xB
4.41D
PEG
1.32B
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
KT
KYIV
46% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
52% below
~-13%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-6%/yr
+93%
1-yr DCF upside
+69%
+87%
5-yr DCF upside
+107%
+79%
10-yr DCF upside
+180%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
KT
Why this score
- Cut its dividend
- Foreign reporter (KRW)
KYIV
Why this score
- Diluting shareholders
- Short track record
The companies
KTKT Corporation
Why now
Telecom Services · market cap $9.3b. Down 20% from 52-week high of $24.58 — deep drawdown territory. 4 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $21.94 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 133% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Net margin 1.5% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 2% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
KYIVKyivstar Group Ltd.
Why now
Telecom Services · market cap $3.1b. 18% off the 52-week high of $16.55. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory. 9 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $17.97 (implying +32% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where KT and KYIV diverge
On the headline score the gap is 34.7 points in favor of KYIV. The widest single difference is Growth, where KYIV leads by 45.3 points.
- GrowthKT 42.9 · KYIV 88.2KYIV +45.3
- ValueKT 27.0 · KYIV 54.1KYIV +27.1
- QualityKT 45.9 · KYIV 67.5KYIV +21.6
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.