Loading…
← CockpitCompetitor Analysis › 5726.T OSAKA Titanium Technologies Co., Ltd.Open in the cockpit ↗

OSAKA Titanium Technologies Co., Ltd.5726.TCompetitor analysis, valuation and peers

Japan · JPY·Materials›Other Metals/Minerals
Momentum laggard 11
Mkt cap
$584M
US dollars, full cap
Free float
87%
of shares outstanding
$/day
$8.18M
20-day average traded
Fwd P/E
30.9×
forward earnings
ROIC−WACC
-2.6 pp
WACC 7.3%
Hurdle
n/a
no reverse DCF
Next earnings
4 days
10 Nov 2026
Close · JPY¥2,061
1D-1.6%
1W-7.4%
1M-14.6%
3M-27.4%
6M-18.1%
YTD+9.6%
1Y-15.7%
ATR %4.9%
52w lowhigh40.0% off high

What OSAKA Titanium Technologies does

Employees: 742

OSAKA Titanium Technologies at a glance

Size OSAKA Titanium Technologies (5726.T) is a Japan Materials company (Other Metals/Minerals) with a market value of $584M, the 990th largest of 1,379 Japan companies the cockpit tracks. Shares closed at ¥2,061 on 6 Nov 2026.

Performance Over six months the shares fell 18.1%, against -29.6% for the median peer and +1.8% for the Japan market (cap-weighted) — 6th highest of 20 in its peer set.

Growth Revenue fell 8.4% over the last twelve months (peer median +8.8%); the operating margin is 12.9% (peer median 7.0%).

Valuation It trades at 30.9× forward earnings against a peer median of 13.0× (2nd most expensive of 7).

Capital Return on invested capital runs 2.6 points below its cost of capital (7.3% WACC).

Next results Next results expected around 10 Nov 2026 (exchange calendar; dates can move).

Relative performance

8010012011 May 202611 Aug 20266 Nov 20265726.T 81Peer median 70
Six months, rebased to 100: OSAKA Titanium Technologies against the median of its 20 peers (local-currency closes).

OSAKA Titanium Technologies financials

Reported figures in JPY; fiscal year ends 2026-03-31. TTM = trailing twelve months.
TTMFY2025FY2024FY2023FY2022
Revenue¥47.2B¥47.0B¥51.9B¥55.3B¥43.1B
Revenue growth—-10%-6%+28%—
Gross profit¥11.9B¥11.1B¥15.7B¥13.0B¥8.64B
EBITDA¥9.25B¥8.48B¥13.0B¥11.1B¥7.25B
Net income¥3.17B¥2.58B¥7.09B¥9.69B¥4.39B
Free cash flown/a-¥5.18B-¥564M-¥619M-¥1.62B
Capital expendituren/a¥9.35B¥3.42B¥2.72B¥2.36B
Total debt¥51.4B¥49.8B¥43.7B¥40.1B¥40.5B

Quarterly statements and history in the cockpit →

OSAKA Titanium Technologies competitor charts

The default views of Competitor Analysis ▸ Charts, drawn from the same data. Open them in the cockpit to change the axes, pin companies and read every value.

Performance: 6-month against 1-month return

-50%0%+50%-40%-20%0%BMN600714MNOSBCLARU300936002225ISO301026S20IMFA6030455009MARISGML5726.T6-month return →1-month return →
Up and to the right = strong over both horizons. OSAKA Titanium Technologies is the large dot.

Fundamentals: revenue growth against valuation

0%+20%10×20×30×40×SBCL002225IMFA5009SGML5726.TRevenue growth (TTM) →Forward P/E →
Further right = faster growth; higher = more expensive. The dashed lines are the peer medians. OSAKA Titanium Technologies is the large dot.

OSAKA Titanium Technologies competitors and peer comparison

How OSAKA Titanium Technologies compares with its peers

Peer set: Industry: the same industry and sector in any market, nearest in size. This is the same default set the interactive Competitor Analysis opens with.

OSAKA Titanium Technologies against its 20 peers (data as of 6 Nov 2026)
Measure5726.TPeer medianRank in peer set
1-month return-14.6%-13.2%10th lowest of 20
6-month return-18.1%-29.6%6th highest of 20
Distance from 52-week high-40.0%-45.6%8th highest of 20
Revenue growth (TTM)-8.4%+8.8%2nd lowest of 13
Operating margin12.9%7.0%5th highest of 14
Forward P/E30.9×13.0×2nd most expensive of 7
ROIC minus cost of capital-2.6 pp-2.3 pp9th lowest of 18
EV / EBITDA14.9×17.4×3rd cheapest of 7
Net debt / EBITDA5.0×3.7×4th most indebted of 8

Peer table

Peer set: Industry: the same industry and sector in any market, nearest in size
CompanyMarketMarket cap6M returnRevenue growthOp. marginForward P/EReq gDelivered g
OSAKA Titanium Technologies 5726.TJapan$584M-18%-8%13%30.9×n/an/a
Bannerman Energy BMN.AXAustralia$578M-15%n/an/an/an/an/a
Qinghai Jinrui Mineral Development 600714.SSChina$593M-38%-6%5%n/a53.0%+15.3%
Meridian Mining MNO.TOCanada$598M-8%n/an/an/an/an/a
Shivalik Bimetal Controls SBCL.NSIndia$609M+61%+19%21%42.3×45.7%+22.8%
Arafura Rare Earths ARU.AXAustralia$610M-56%n/an/an/an/an/a
Changzhou Zhongying Science & Technology 300936.SZChina$556M-32%+15%-4%n/an/an/a
Abenojar Tungsten ABT.LUnited Kingdom$619Mn/an/an/an/an/an/a
Puyang Refractories 002225.SZChina$550M-28%+2%2%14.6×24.5%+5.7%
IsoEnergy ISO.TOCanada$549M-30%n/an/an/an/an/a
Lumina Metals LMCU.TOCanada$544M-33%n/an/an/an/an/a
Hootech 301026.SZChina$541M-27%+121%3%n/an/an/a
Straits Trading S20.SISingapore$541M-14%+30%13%n/a0.6%+15.1%
Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys IMFA.NSIndia$633M-25%+32%23%10.2×n/an/a
Lingyuan Iron & Steel 600231.SSChina$642M-31%-3%-14%n/an/an/a
Fuda New Material 603045.SSChina$645M-31%+63%7%n/an/an/a
Gloria Material Technology 5009.TWOTaiwan$527M-15%+3%10%11.3×n/an/a
Marimaca Copper MARI.TOCanada$652M-18%n/an/an/an/an/a
Sigma Lithium SGMLUnited States$655M-73%-14%24%20.5×14.8%-13.9%
Core Lithium CXO.AXAustralia$516M-35%n/a-160%7.8×n/an/a
Guangdong Mingzhu 600382.SSChina$512M-36%-6%18%n/a-4.3%-9.4%

Questions

Which companies are OSAKA Titanium Technologies's closest peers?
The cockpit's peer set: Bannerman Energy (BMN.AX), Qinghai Jinrui Mineral Development (600714.SS), Meridian Mining (MNO.TO), Shivalik Bimetal Controls (SBCL.NS), Arafura Rare Earths (ARU.AX), Changzhou Zhongying Science & Technology (300936.SZ), Abenojar Tungsten (ABT.L), Puyang Refractories (002225.SZ).
Is OSAKA Titanium Technologies expensive compared with its peers?
On forward p/e it trades at 30.9× against a peer median of 13.0×, 2nd most expensive of 7 in its peer set.
How has OSAKA Titanium Technologies stock performed?
Over six months to 6 Nov 2026 the shares returned -18.1% against -29.6% for the median peer; over one year -15.7%.

How these numbers are made. Returns are close-to-close in local currency. Revenue growth and margins are trailing twelve months. Req g is the revenue growth that today's enterprise value requires for seven years at the company's own cost of capital; Delivered g is what it actually grew; the gap is the hurdle (honest precision about ±8 points, so read the ranking more than the decimal). No fair values, price targets or analyst ratings are shown, by design. Method and validation.