The latest financial stability ranking from Sinovoltaics keeps Tesla, Mustang Battery, Kung Long Batteries, Hyundai Electric and Eaton, in the top five spots in a report that includes 55 manufacturers.
From pv magazine Global
Sinovoltaics, a Hong Kong-based technical compliance and quality assurance services provider, has released its Q4 PV Energy Storage Manufacturer Ranking Report. Global in scope, it provides financial stability scores tracked over the past three years. It covers 55 battery energy storage suppliers, a figure that has remained unchanged since the last edition published in July,
The report, which is available to download for free, recorded some shifts in the rankings, according to the analysts who highlighted improved scores for three Chinese manufacturers. Specifically, Sacred Sun (Shandong Sacred Sun Power Sources Co Ltd) moved from spot 15 to number 10, while CATL jumped from 26 to 21 and BYD climbed up to 28 from spot 30.
The top ten segment of the ranking lists U.S.-based Tesla at the top, followed by China’s Mustang Battery, Taiwan-based Kung Long Batteries, Hyundai Electric of Korea and Eaton, based in Ireland, China-based Sinexcel, Yuasa Battery and Sanyo, both based in Japan, U.S. based Enersys, and China’s Sacred Sun.
The latest edition covers December 2021 to September 2024 and is meant to provide insight into the changes in the scores over time, according to Sinovoltaics.
The financial stability analysis of the publicly traded battery producers uses the so-called Altmann Z-scores. It is a balance sheet-based model using publicly available financial information to track financial strength over the past three years. It assesses a company’s financial strength through a credit-strength test based on profitability, leverage, liquidity, solvency, and activity ratios, according to Sinovoltaics.
A score that is 1.1 or lower indicates a higher probability of bankruptcy within the next two years, while a higher score of 2.6 or greater. The reports include a chart that groups manufacturers into those with scores that put them in the safe zone, those with lower scores in the grey zone, and those with scores that indicate distress. In the safe zone this quarter there were 21 companies, compared to 20 in the last quarter.
