Point Zero AS
Not financial advice. The index, rank, signals and advice are rule-based indications from the latest filed annual accounts. They are not a credit rating, an assessment of management or a recommendation to buy, sell or do business with the company. Read more
Score · fiscal year 2025
25of 100
How to read this: the company is ahead of 11 % of companies in the Morning class Small in the same sector in 2025. What does this mean?
Rank in the Morning class Small: 1,813 of 2,037 · What are Morning company classes?
Place in the whole sector: 6,258 of 7,072 · Industri
Profile
Beaver · Builder
Lower profitability, lower resilience
Position against comparable companies in 2025, not a verdict on the company. Based on profitability 37 and resilience 23 out of 100 among companies in the Morning class Small in the same sector in 2025. Methodology
Against the sector
Point Zero AS is 26 points below the median for companies in the Morning class Small in the same sector in 2025.
Median score 51 among 2,037 companies.
Against companies in the Morning class Small in the same sector in 2025: operating margin 3.7% (median 4.6%) and equity ratio 19.6% (median 42.5%).
How it has gone · 2023–2025
Revenue rose by 28 % from 2023 to 2025, to 14.3 MNOK. The operating margin fell from 23.5% in 2023 to 3.7% in 2025. The equity ratio rose from 11.3% in 2023 to 19.6% in 2025.
Amounts in the reporting currency. The full year-by-year table is further down under «Details». See every figure year by year
Point Zero AS has a score of 25 for 2025, rank 6,258 of 7,072 in the sector.
Strongest: Consistency: percentile 38 against peers.
Weakest: Growth: percentile 8 against peers, revenue growth −18.4% against a median of 5.3%. Liquidity: percentile 13 against peers, current ratio 0.99 against a median of 1.78.
Worth a closer look
- The operating result does not cover the financial costs. How will the debt be serviced, and what do the lenders say? Based on: interest coverage (times) 0.7 (median 6.4); financial costs as a share of debt 5.7% (median 2.0%).
- Consider strengthening liquidity: current liabilities are 1.0 times current assets. Based on: current ratio 0.99 (median 1.78).
- The company made a loss before tax. Are these one-off items or a pattern? Based on: profit margin −1.4% (median 4.5%).
- What lies behind weak growth, and will it last?
Written by fixed rules from the figures. Describes the figures, does not explain causes. Not investment or financial advice. How the summary is made
Worth a closer look
- critical
The operating result does not cover the financial costs. How will the debt be serviced, and what do the lenders say?
Based on: Interest coverage (times) 0.7 (median 6.4); Financial costs as a share of debt 5.7% (median 2.0%).
- watch
Consider strengthening liquidity: current liabilities are 1.0 times current assets.
Based on: Current ratio 0.99 (median 1.78).
- watch
The company made a loss before tax. Are these one-off items or a pattern?
Based on: Profit margin −1.4% (median 4.5%).
- watch
Current liabilities exceed current assets other than bank deposits, and the current ratio is weak. Is it customer prepayments and supplier credit that fund the operations, or short-term loans that must be renewed?
Based on: Net working capital to revenue −2.1% (median 3.6%); Current ratio 0.99 (median 1.78).
Indications based on the latest annual accounts from open data. Not investment or financial advice.
Financial costs were 5.7% of the debt in 2025. The policy rate averaged 4.30 % the same year. This is a plain description of what the debt cost, not a model of interest sensitivity.
See interest rates, prices and exchange rates for the sector
Data quality
No anomalies found in the figures.
Scenario analysis: the sector's weakest year
We have no accounts for 2022, the sector's weakest year, for this company.
The sector's weakest year was 2022, with a median operating margin of −0.4%. Based on the 10 fiscal years we have. The analysis grows as more years are fetched or imported. Methodology
What the score is made of
| Profitability | 37 | weight 40% |
|---|---|---|
| Solidity | 19 | weight 20% |
| Liquidity | 13 | weight 5% |
| Growth | 8 | weight 25% |
| Consistency | 38 | weight 10% |
Three goals: profitability 40%, growth 25%, resilience 35%. Why these weights?
Durability: 45 (average over 3 years)
Index version 3. Data completeness 100%: the share of the weights that had data.
The numbers behind the score
| Measure | Company | Median |
|---|---|---|
| Operating revenue | 14 MNOK | 21 MNOK |
| Operating margin | 3.7% | 4.6% |
| Profit margin | −1.4% | 4.5% |
| Return on assets | 3.4% | 9.6% |
| Equity ratio | 19.6% | 42.5% |
| Debt-to-equity | 4.09 | 1.24 |
| Current ratio | 0.99 | 1.78 |
| Revenue growth | −18.4% | 5.3% |
| Revenue per employee | 2.04 MNOK | 1.78 MNOK |
The median and “ahead of” refer to companies in the Morning class Small in the same sector in 2025. The bar shows the share of companies the figure is ahead of.
With an index of 25, Point Zero AS does better than 11% of companies in the Morning class Small in the same sector (2,037 companies) in 2025.
Score 2023–2025
- Point Zero AS
- Median: companies in the Morning class Small in the same sector
Working capital and debt
| Measure | Company | Median | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Working capital | |||
| Receivable days All current receivables, including those on group companies, in days of revenue. |
88 days | 47 days | |
| Inventory and other current assets, days Current assets other than receivables and bank deposits, that is inventory and short-term investments, in days of revenue. |
0 days | 33 days | |
| Net working capital to revenue Current assets less bank deposits less current liabilities, divided by revenue. Negative: short-term debt funds the operations. |
−2.1% | 3.6% | |
| Cash share of current assets How much of the short-term buffer is bank deposits and cash. |
7.3% | 26.7% | |
| Debt and interest burden | |||
| Interest coverage (times) Operating result divided by all financial costs. Below 1: operations do not cover the cost of the debt. |
0.7 | 6.4 | |
| Financial costs as a share of debt All financial costs (interest, currency losses and other) divided by all debt, interest-free debt included. Not an interest rate. |
5.7% | 2.0% | |
| Long-term share of debt Long-term debt as a share of all debt. A low share means more falls due within a year. |
70.7% | 21.1% | |
Net working capital (current assets less bank deposits less current liabilities): −0.3 MNOK.
Of the financial costs of 0.7 MNOK, 0.7 MNOK is reported as interest costs in the accounts.
The median and the bar refer to companies in the Morning class Small in the same sector in 2025. The bar shows the share of the group with a lower figure: higher is not always better, long receivable days tie up capital, for example. These figures do not count in the score.
The industry or the company: what drove the result?
In 2025 the operating margin of Point Zero AS fell by 14.2 percentage points. Comparable companies rose by a median 0.0 points. So the company did 14.2 points weaker than the industry, for reasons of its own.
Over 2 year-to-year changes Point Zero AS moved the same way as comparable companies 0 times. About 0% of the changes in operating margin were common to the industry; the rest was the company's own.
| Year | The company | Comparable (median) | Change, company | Change, industry | The company's own |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 17.9% | 4.6% | −5.6 percentage points | 0.0 percentage points | −5.5 percentage points |
| 2025 | 3.7% | 4.6% | −14.2 percentage points | +0.0 percentage points | −14.2 percentage points |
Comparable companies are those in the same industry and Morning company class. Their change shows what hit the whole industry, the sector drivers below included. The rest is the company's own: contracts, costs, one-off items or operations. The share is approximate, and we claim no cause.
The company and its sector's drivers
Prices, rate and currency that shape the sector's year, year by year beside the operating margin of Point Zero AS. The figures stand side by side; we claim no cause.
Producer prices in manufacturing (indeks (2021 = 100))
Producer prices in manufacturing rose 2.9% in 2025; the operating margin of Point Zero AS fell 14.2 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Producer prices in manufacturing, annual average | 100.0 | 124.7 | 129.5 | 134.4 | 138.3 | 146.7 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +10.7% | +24.7% | +3.9% | +3.7% | +2.9% | +6.1% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 23.5% | 17.9% | 3.7% | – |
Source: SSB (12462, CC BY 4.0). Source
EUR/NOK (kr)
EUR/NOK rose 0.8% in 2025; the operating margin of Point Zero AS fell 14.2 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EUR/NOK, annual average | 10.16 | 10.10 | 11.42 | 11.62 | 11.72 | 11.04 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | −5.2% | −0.6% | +13.1% | +1.8% | +0.8% | −5.8% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 23.5% | 17.9% | 3.7% | – |
Source: Norges Bank (EXR, NLOD 2.0). Source
Wholesale power price (øre per kWh)
Wholesale power price rose 9.4% in 2025; the operating margin of Point Zero AS fell 14.2 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wholesale power price, annual average | 64.2 | 141.7 | 72.0 | 49.4 | 54.0 | 96.5 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +466.7% | +120.8% | −49.2% | −31.4% | +9.4% | +78.4% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 23.5% | 17.9% | 3.7% | – |
Source: SSB (09363, CC BY 4.0). Source
USD/NOK (kr)
USD/NOK fell 3.3% in 2025; the operating margin of Point Zero AS fell 14.2 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| USD/NOK, annual average | 8.59 | 9.61 | 10.56 | 10.75 | 10.39 | 9.54 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | −8.8% | +11.9% | +9.9% | +1.7% | −3.3% | −8.2% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 23.5% | 17.9% | 3.7% | – |
Source: Norges Bank (EXR, NLOD 2.0). Source
Wage index: fabricated metal products (indeks)
Wage index: fabricated metal products rose 5.8% in 2025; the operating margin of Point Zero AS fell 14.2 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wage index: fabricated metal products, annual average | 88.0 | 91.5 | 96.9 | 102.1 | 108.0 | 112.8 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +3.1% | +3.9% | +6.0% | +5.4% | +5.8% | +4.5% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 23.5% | 17.9% | 3.7% | – |
Source: SSB (12314, CC BY 4.0). Source
We show the drivers and the margin side by side and claim no cause. Sensitivity per company is not computed until we have at least 10 years of accounts per company: with three years such figures are false precision.
What the numbers say
Point Zero AS had an operating margin of 3.7% and an equity ratio of 19.6% in 2025, and ranks 6,258 of 7,072 in Industri.
From 2024 to 2025: went from a profit to a loss before tax and the operating margin fell from 17.9% to 3.7%.
This text is generated automatically from the 2025 accounts.
Three simple methods
The methods give between 6 MNOK and 16 MNOK.
| Method | Multiple | Estimate |
|---|---|---|
| P/E | 22.2 | 16 MNOK |
| EV/EBIT | 18.6 | 15 MNOK |
| P/B | 3.0 | 6 MNOK |
| EV/EBIT: from enterprise value to equity | NOK |
|---|---|
| Enterprise value (EV) at the listed multiple | 39 MNOK |
| Enterprise value after the size adjustment | 24 MNOK |
| Less net debt (rough figure) | 9 MNOK |
| Equity value | 15 MNOK |
Net debt is a rough figure: long-term liabilities minus cash. The accounts do not split interest-bearing debt from other liabilities, and short-term borrowings are not included. The size adjustment applies to the enterprise value, not to the debt. Net debt is 36% of the enterprise value after the size adjustment, so the equity value from EV/EBIT is sensitive to errors in the debt figure.
The listed basis is the value at listed multiples. The estimate is lowered for size: a small-company premium of 4% on the cost of equity gives a value 38% lower. No separate marketability discount is applied, because the premium already allows for the company being small and unlisted.
The NACE code has no listed industry of its own in the table, so the multiples are the sector median: Machinery, Food Processing, Chemical (Specialty), Building Materials, Packaging & Container.
Not financial advice. The value range is a rough model estimate from listed-company multiples, not a valuation, a price target or a price offer. The actual value may differ greatly. Read more
A mechanical estimate from public accounts, not advice. A mechanical estimate from public accounts with listed multiples and fixed adjustments. Not a valuation and not advice to buy or sell. See the calculation
Questions and answers
How profitable is Point Zero AS?
The operating margin was 3.7% in 2025, against a median of 4.6% among companies in the Morning class Small in the same sector. Return on assets was 3.4%. The company made a loss before tax.
How solid is Point Zero AS?
The equity ratio was 19.6% in 2025 (median 42.5%). Debt-to-equity was 4.09 (median 1.24).
What is the liquidity of Point Zero AS like?
The current ratio was 0.99 in 2025 (median 1.78). Current assets did not cover current liabilities.
How does Point Zero AS compare in Industri?
Point Zero AS ranks 6,258 of 7,072 in Industri for 2025. Among companies in the Morning class Small it is number 1,813 of 2,037. Revenue changed by −18.4% from the year before.
Competitors
The 8 closest competitors in the same line of business, placed in the same matrix as the sector page: profitability up, resilience to the right. These are the companies the competitor analysis and the strategy report compare with.
Each bubble is a company: this company and its closest competitors in the same line of business and size, the same ones the competitor analysis uses. Placement is 0–100 against the whole sector and Morning company class: further right is more robust, higher up is more profitable. Bubble size is revenue. The light bubble and arrow show where the company stood the year before. Pick a profile to see fewer at a time.
| Company | Profile | Operating revenue | Operating margin | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DM Energy AS |  Beaver |
15 MNOK | −4.6% | 27 |
| Kragerø Maskinering AS |  Cheetah |
15 MNOK | 21.5% | 72 |
| Engineering Welding Coating Industry AS | Beaver |
15 MNOK | −2.3% | 18 |
| GUSTAVSEN & Slemdal AS |  Lion |
15 MNOK | 4.2% | 54 |
| Point Zero AS (this company) | Beaver |
14 MNOK | 3.7% | 25 |
| Aase Gnist AS | Cheetah |
14 MNOK | 38.2% | 60 |
| Øst Inspeksjon AS | Cheetah |
14 MNOK | 19.5% | 63 |
| Rogaland Maskinering AS · same municipality |  Elephant |
14 MNOK | −4.8% | 25 |
| Golax AS | Beaver |
13 MNOK | 1.5% | 45 |
The selection is the closest in revenue within the same industry code. When you order, you can swap competitors. Order competitor analysis
From the Central Coordinating Register
- Org. no.
- 893603182
- Legal form
- AS
- Sector
- Industri (25.530)
- Purpose
- Bearbeiding av metall og plastmateriell samt deltakelse i annen virksomhet med lignende formål.
- Morning company class
- Small
- Employees
- 7 registered 10 December 2025
- Founded
- 2 January 2009 17 years in operation
- Share capital
- 0.30 MNOK
- Business address
- Tjemslandsmarka 20, 4360 VARHAUG (HÅ)
- Municipality
- Hå rank 10–35 of 38 in KOSTRA group 7
- Latest accounts filed
- 2025
- VAT registered
- Yes
- Former names
- Grødeland AS until 2021, Grødeland Holding AS until 2016
- LEI
- 254900X415BVYIYBA759 not renewed (lapsed)
Source: Central Coordinating Register, Brønnøysund Register Centre. The employee count is reported by the company and may be older than the accounts. See the company at the Brønnøysund Register Centre
Ownership and roles
Loading roles …
Source: Central Coordinating Register, fetched 1 November 2026. Only names are shown.
- Parent company
- No parent company: owned by persons
Source: GLEIF (Global Legal Entity Identifier Foundation), fetched 30 October 2026. The parent is the one the company itself reported to GLEIF.
Shareholders (2025)
- Number of shareholders
- 5
- Largest owner
- 20.0% · top three 60.0%
- Split
- companies 100% · private persons 0% · foreign 0%
- Fungus AS · 20.0%
- Heptagon AS · 20.0%
- E Madland Holding AS · 20.0%
- S Træland Holding AS · 20.0%
- Sjøhare AS · 20.0%
The company is new in the shareholder register in 2025.
Source: the Norwegian Tax Administration's shareholder register as of 2025. Figures may be older than today's ownership. Private persons are not shown by name.
Error in the data?
Do you see an error in the figures or in how the company is mapped (sector, holding, group)? Let us know. Corrections require documentation.
Is this your company? Suggest changes or add information
Figures last fetched 30 October 2026.
Year by year · 2023–2025
| Key figure | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Index | 52 | 56 | 25 | |
| Rank | 3,146 | 2,668 | 6,258 | |
| Operating margin | 23.5% | 17.9% | 3.7% | |
| Return on assets | 21.9% | 17.7% | 3.4% | |
| Equity ratio | 11.3% | 18.5% | 19.6% | |
| Current ratio | 0.71 | 1.07 | 0.99 | |
| Revenue growth | – | 56.7% | −18.4% |
Accounts
From the Brønnøysund Register Centre, in the company's reporting currency (NOK).
| Key figure | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operating revenue | 11.2 MNOK | 17.5 MNOK | 14.3 MNOK |
| Operating profit | 2.6 MNOK | 3.1 MNOK | 0.5 MNOK |
| Profit before tax | 2.3 MNOK | 2.5 MNOK | −0.2 MNOK |
| Tax expense | 0.5 MNOK | 0.5 MNOK | 0.0 MNOK |
| Net profit | 1.8 MNOK | 1.9 MNOK | −0.2 MNOK |
| Financial expenses | 0.3 MNOK | 0.7 MNOK | 0.7 MNOK |
| Total assets | 12.0 MNOK | 17.7 MNOK | 15.9 MNOK |
| Current assets | 2.6 MNOK | 4.1 MNOK | 3.7 MNOK |
| Equity | 1.4 MNOK | 3.3 MNOK | 3.1 MNOK |
| Retained earnings | 1.1 MNOK | 3.0 MNOK | 2.8 MNOK |
| Total liabilities | 10.6 MNOK | 14.5 MNOK | 12.8 MNOK |
| Current liabilities | 3.8 MNOK | 3.8 MNOK | 3.7 MNOK |
Source: Brønnøysund Register Centre (Register of Company Accounts), fetched 30 October 2026, accounts id 6361243.
Further
Similar companies
- Masse Gjenbruks Senteret AS index 25, rank 6,250 · compare
- Moss Automation AS index 25, rank 6,251 · compare
- Kongsberg Ferrotech AS index 25, rank 6,253 · compare
- Mona Mek AS index 25, rank 6,263 · compare
- Liholmen Produksjon AS index 25, rank 6,267 · compare