Grab Holdings Limited's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Grab Holdings Limited (GRAB) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Grab Holdings Limited vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 3,370M vs 111,555M combined for tracked competitors (2.9% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+300.0% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+92.1%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Grab Holdings Limited generated 20.5% revenue growth year over year in Q4 2025, vs 13.8% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 5.9% net margin compares with 6.4% for the peer group.
- Scale: Grab Holdings Limited ranks #28 of 168 companies by market capitalization in the Professional Services industry, holding 0.4% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Grab Holdings Limited accounted for 5.9% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 5.6% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $1.12M compares with $1.22M for the peer group (0.9x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
GRAB Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2025
Grab Holdings Limited reported revenue growth of 20.49 % year on year in Q4 2025, above its competitors' combined revenue growth of 13.78 %.
With a net margin of 5.93 %, Grab Holdings Limited reported lower profitability than its competitors (6.41 %).
Grab Holdings Limited generated 5.92 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 5.61 % a year earlier.
Grab Holdings Limited vs. its Competitors, Q4 2025
Revenue growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Grab Holdings Limited and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Grab Holdings Limited | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (4) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Grab Holdings Limited's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Professional Services industry grew revenue 6.8% year over year, combined, vs 20.5% for Grab Holdings Limited. Grab Holdings Limited's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.52% to 0.59%, a gain of 0.07 percentage points.
Grab Holdings Limited's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grab Holdings Limited | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (4) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 57.10 % (4 of 7) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 14.30 % (1 of 7) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
GRAB Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
GRAB Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
GRAB Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Uber Technologies Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Doordash Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Lyft Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Grab Holdings Limited's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Grab Holdings Limited's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Publicly Traded Peers of Grab Holdings Limited
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Grab Holdings Limited | 13,017.83 | 3,370.00 |
| Uber Technologies Inc | 139,743.34 | 55,227.00 |
| Doordash Inc | 78,374.75 | 15,891.00 |
| Lyft Inc | 5,748.65 | 6,771.94 |
| Didi Global inc | - | 33,665.16 |
| SUBTOTAL | 236,884.57 | 114,925.10 |
Sources: Grab Holdings Limited's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Grab Holdings Limited versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Grab Holdings Limited's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Grabcar Sdn. Bhd. | Named by the company | 85% |
| MyTeksi Sdn. Bhd. | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Grab Holdings Limited's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Grab Holdings Limited's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Uber Technologies Inc | Mobility 51.49 % |
| Doordash Inc | Reportable 100.00 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Grab Holdings Limited's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grab Holdings Limited | 13,018 | 1,123,333 | 66,667 |
| Uber Technologies Inc | 139,743 | 1,624,324 | 284,324 |
| Doordash Inc | 78,375 | 506,083 | 26,688 |
| Lyft Inc | 5,749 | 1,730,626 | 732,346 |
| Didi Global inc | - | 1,507,283 | 6,683 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 223,867 | 1,217,213 | 147,520 |
Grab Holdings Limited's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Uber Technologies Inc | United States and Canada 53.99 % |
| Doordash Inc | United States 83.55 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Grab Holdings Limited's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 155 companies in Grab Holdings Limited's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Grab Holdings Limited ranks #28 of 155 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 0.39 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 1,029, indicating a unconcentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Visa Inc | 705,447 | 22.66 % |
| 2 | Mastercard Incorporated | 500,352 | 16.07 % |
| 3 | Repay Holdings Corporation | 308,989 | 9.93 % |
| 4 | Alibaba Group Holding Limited | 254,590 | 8.18 % |
| 5 | Uber Technologies Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Accenture Plc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Pdd Holdings inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Orix Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Mercadolibre Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Uxin Limited | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 28 | Grab Holdings Limited | 12,211 | 0.39 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Grab Holdings Limited's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-28.
Grab Holdings Limited's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 23 | Fair Isaac Corp | 18,919 | -46.18 % |
| 24 | Fidelity National Information Services Inc | 17,883 | -45.78 % |
| 25 | Akamai Technologies Inc | 17,430 | 50.45 % |
| 26 | Rb Global Inc | 15,289 | -24.97 % |
| 27 | Trip com Group Limited | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 28 | Grab Holdings Limited | 12,211 | -50.48 % |
| 29 | Costar Group Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 30 | Maplebear Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 31 | Etsy Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 32 | Healthequity Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 33 | Zillow Group Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Grab Holdings Limited's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-28. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Grab Holdings Limited's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Professional Services industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (230 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 43.20 % | 47.17 % (avg) | -4.0 pp |
| Operating Margin | 1.93 % | industry median | +0.1 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 13.23 % | 5.74 % (avg) | +7.5 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 2.88 % | 4.25 % (avg) | -1.4 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Grab Holdings Limited's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Professional Services industry average (230 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 92.1x | 25.6x | +66.5x |
| EV / EBITDA | - | 15.4x | - |
| P/B | - | 3.7x | - |
| Return on Equity | 2.96 % | industry aggregate | -15.66 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 0.45 % | 5.25 % (avg) | -4.80 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Grab Holdings Limited's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 64.62 % | 18.57 % | 20.49 % |
| Operating Margin | -22.00 % | -6.01 % | 1.93 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -3.71 % | -1.28 % | 0.45 % |
| P/E | - | - | 92.1x |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Grab Holdings Limited's Strategic Group Map
Every company in Grab Holdings Limited's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Grab Holdings Limited is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
Grab Holdings Limited's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Grab Holdings Limited's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) a common framework, not a precision instrument.
Grab Holdings Limited falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.02x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 5.2% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
Grab Holdings Limited's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | High | Industry HHI of 1,029 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 2.88 % vs industry average 4.25 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Grab Holdings Limited's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Grab Holdings Limited's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Grab Holdings Limited's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Grab Holdings Limited falls in the Low attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Harvest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Grab Holdings Limited's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+300.0% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Return on equity 15.7 points below the industry aggregate.
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.02x).
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
No rule matched.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Grab Holdings Limited's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grab Holdings Limited | 0.74 | 1.75 | 0.06 |
| Uber Technologies Inc | 0.54 | 1.04 | 0.42 |
| Doordash Inc | 0.71 | 1.54 | 0.27 |
| Lyft Inc | 0.25 | 0.63 | 0.41 |
| Didi Global inc | 0.41 | 1.36 | 0.00 |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Grab Holdings Limited's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grab Holdings Limited | Q4 2025 | +20.5 % | - |
| Uber Technologies Inc | Q2 2026 | +12.2 % | +79.0 % |
| Doordash Inc | Q2 2026 | +35.6 % | -29.9 % |
| Lyft Inc | Q2 2026 | +16.1 % | +24.8 % |
| Didi Global inc | Q4 2025 | +9.6 % | -21.2 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +12.7 % | +76.7 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Grab Holdings Limited's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grab Holdings Limited | Q4 2025 | +17.9 % | +26.0 % |
| Uber Technologies Inc | Q2 2026 | +2.7 % | -21.3 % |
| Doordash Inc | Q2 2026 | +30.4 % | +35.6 % |
| Lyft Inc | Q2 2026 | -1.0 % | - |
| Didi Global inc | Q4 2025 | +8.4 % | - |
Grab Holdings Limited's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grab Holdings Limited | 1.67% | 2.64% | 2.96% |
| Uber Technologies Inc | 15.42% | 18.91% | 34.91% |
| Doordash Inc | 4.36% | 6.33% | 8.45% |
| Lyft Inc | 34.77% | 77.65% | 115.83% |
| Didi Global inc | 0.64% | 0.79% | 1.02% |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Grab Holdings Limited's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Grab Holdings Limited | 51.58 | 3.86 |
| Uber Technologies Inc | 15.01 | 2.53 |
| Doordash Inc | 93.40 | 4.93 |
| Lyft Inc | 2.16 | 0.85 |
| Didi Global inc | - | - |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 17.27 | 2.06 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.