COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026

KT vs TIMB

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. KT scored 33.8, TIMB scored 56.6 — TIMB leads.
Compare another set
KT
KT Corporation
Telecom Services · Quality-Growth
33.8
$19.60 · $9.3B
Score gap
22.8
TIMB leads
TIMB
TIM S.A.
Telecom Services · Quality-Growth
56.6
$17.77 · $8.4B
fundamentals as of
  • CheapestTIMB10.2x
  • Fastest growthTIMB+4.6%
  • Strongest balance sheetKT0.62
  • Highest qualityTIMB83 / 100
  • Largest discount to fair valueTIMB-76%
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD33.8/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY45.9GROWTH42.9VALUE27.0
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD56.6/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY82.6GROWTH62.8VALUE47.9
KTTIMBQuality45.982.6Growth42.962.8Value27.047.9
cheap & fastrevenue growth →← cheaper (lower multiple)-10%15%5.2x15xKTTIMB

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.

FCFKT$1.3bTIMB$1.8b
RevKT+0.4%TIMB+4.6%
D/EKT0.62TIMB0.66
P/EKT10.2xTIMB10.2x
PEGKT4.41TIMB1.53
KT
stronger →← stronger
TIMB
46
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
83
43
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
63
27
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
48
TIMB is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
KT
TIMB
$1.3bC+
FCF
$1.8bC+
+0.4%C
Rev
+4.6%C+
0.62B
D/E
0.66B
10.2xA-
P/E
10.2xA-
4.41D
PEG
1.53C+
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.
KT
TIMB
46% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
76% below
~-13%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-23%/yr
+93%
1-yr DCF upside
+251%
+87%
5-yr DCF upside
+318%
+79%
10-yr DCF upside
+440%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
KT
Why this score
  • Cut its dividend
  • Foreign reporter (KRW)
TIMB
Why this score
  • Durable high returns
  • Cut its dividend
  • Foreign reporter (BRL)
KTKT Corporation
Telecom Services · $19.60 · beta 0.09
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.
TIMBTIM S.A.
Telecom Services · $17.77 · beta 0.11
Why now
Telecom Services · market cap $8.4b. Down 37% from 52-week high of $28.22 — deep drawdown territory. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $24.24 (implying +36% upside).
Moat
Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 18% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. 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
Down 37% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Dividend payout 89% of earnings on a 8.8% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
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 TIMB diverge

On the headline score the gap is 22.8 points in favor of TIMB. The widest single difference is Quality, where TIMB leads by 36.7 points.

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.