PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Outdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchCodan is an ASX-listed technology company, but it is not a like-for-like stand-in for every business grouped under that label. Its operations span mission-critical communications and Minelab metal detectors. Investors comparing Codan with other ASX technology shares should start with what each business sells and how it earns revenue, then compare growth, profitability, revenue visibility, exposure and valuation using consistent periods and definitions.
What makes Codan different from a typical technology-sector comparison?
Codan Limited (ASX:CDA) operates across communications and metal detection. Its portfolio includes Minelab detectors and mission-critical communications businesses. Those activities have different products, customers and demand drivers from software, IT services or other technology categories, so a broad sector classification is not enough to establish a useful peer group. Codan’s corporate and product information describes its businesses.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
For the year ended 30 June 2025 (FY25), Codan reported communications revenue of $413.5 million and metal-detection revenue of $254.8 million in its annual report. These are FY25 segment figures; they should not be treated as a segment breakdown for FY26.
Recommended Free Tools
For the year ended 30 June 2026 (FY26), Codan’s investor overview reports revenue of $875.0 million, up 30%; EBIT of $244.1 million, up 67%; NPAT of $175.2 million, up 69%; and a fully franked annual dividend of 48.5 cents per share, up 70% against FY25. These are company-reported group headline results, not evidence by themselves that Codan is better valued than another share.
#1 Best Overall
Codan says FY26 revenue growth reflected ongoing demand for unmanned systems, new gold-detector products and a full-year contribution from Kägwerks. These are the company’s stated drivers; investors should distinguish acquired contribution from organic growth wherever company reporting makes that split available.
What should investors compare?
Build the comparison around the underlying businesses rather than the word “technology.” For each company, use the same reporting period where possible and note when a disclosure is absent or defined differently.
| Dimension | What to examine | How to keep the comparison fair |
|---|---|---|
| Business mix | Products and services, customer types, operating segments and the contribution of each segment. | Compare the actual sources of revenue, not just sector labels. Codan’s FY25 communications and metal-detection revenues are reported for FY25, not FY26. |
| Growth quality | Organic growth, acquisitions, product launches and changes in demand. | Separate acquired revenue from growth in existing operations when the company discloses the split. Treat management’s stated drivers as company explanations. |
| Profitability | Group EBIT, NPAT and segment earnings or margins, if disclosed. | Compare the same measure and period. Group EBIT is not interchangeable with segment profit or NPAT. |
| Revenue visibility | Orderbook, backlog, recurring revenue or other forward indicators, where reported. | Check the definition, coverage and timing of each measure; unlike indicators are not directly equivalent. |
| Exposure | End markets, major customers, geographies and product cycles. | Use company filings to assess concentration and cyclicality rather than assuming businesses with a technology label share the same risks. |
| Capital needs | Investment required for production, research and development, acquisitions and working capital. | Consider the demands of the business model and how investment is funded; a services firm and a physical-products company may have different needs. |
| Valuation | Share price, market value, debt and cash, and relevant earnings or cash-flow multiples. | Use a common date and consistent accounting definitions. State how debt and cash are treated, and avoid inferring cheapness or expensiveness from profit growth alone. |
How to make the comparison usable
- Define the peer group by business activity. Identify which companies have a genuinely comparable revenue model, customer base or end market. A company can belong to a broad technology classification without being a close operating peer to Codan.
- Align reporting periods and measures. Label every figure with its financial year and use the same measure across the companies being compared. Keep Codan’s FY25 segment revenues separate from its FY26 group results.
- Separate reported performance from its explanation. Record revenue and earnings figures as reported, then identify whether growth came from existing operations, acquisitions, product changes or demand conditions when those details are disclosed.
- Read forward indicators in context. An orderbook, backlog and recurring-revenue figure may cover different periods and use different definitions. Do not rank companies by these measures without explaining the distinction.
- Compare valuation on one date. Pair market prices and company financial data on a consistent basis, and state the multiple and balance-sheet treatment. A year-on-year rise in earnings does not establish what investors are paying for those earnings.
What can be concluded from the available Codan figures?
Codan’s published FY26 headline results show higher revenue, EBIT, NPAT and dividend than the prior year, while its FY25 annual report shows that communications and metal detection are substantial parts of its business. That is useful context for understanding Codan’s own performance, but it is not a quantitative ranking against other ASX technology shares.
A current, date-matched peer comparison would require primary-source company results and market data for the selected peers, including consistent valuation inputs. Without those figures, no defensible conclusion about which ASX technology share is cheaper, faster-growing or more profitable follows from Codan’s results alone.
Quick Recap
Best Value
- Used Book in Good Condition
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
