Ringdalskogen 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
29of 100
How to read this: the company is ahead of 12 % of companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025. What does this mean?
Rank in the Morning class Micro: 20,962 of 23,906 · What are Morning company classes?
Place in the whole sector: 26,534 of 30,136 · Eiendom
Profile
Beaver · Builder
Lower profitability, lower resilience
Position against comparable companies in 2025, not a verdict on the company. Based on profitability 35 and resilience 30 out of 100 among companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025. Methodology
Against the sector
Ringdalskogen AS is 21 points below the median for companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025.
Median score 50 among 23,900 companies.
Against companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025: operating margin 51.3% (median 47.7%) and equity ratio 22.6% (median 27.9%).
The numbers behind the score
| Measure | Company | Median |
|---|---|---|
| Operating revenue | 6 MNOK | 2 MNOK |
| Operating margin | 51.3% | 47.7% |
| Profit margin | −76.6% | 24.4% |
| Return on assets | 1.8% | 7.8% |
| Equity ratio | 22.6% | 27.9% |
| Debt-to-equity | 3.43 | 2.10 |
| Current ratio | 0.03 | 1.40 |
| Revenue growth | −2.0% | 3.3% |
The median and “ahead of” refer to companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025. The bar shows the share of companies the figure is ahead of.
With an index of 29, Ringdalskogen AS does better than 12% of companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector (23,906 companies) in 2025.
Score 2023–2025
- Ringdalskogen AS
- Median: companies in the Morning class Micro 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. |
24 days | 40 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 | |
| Net working capital to revenue Current assets less bank deposits less current liabilities, divided by revenue. Negative: short-term debt funds the operations. |
– | −12.4% | |
| Cash share of current assets How much of the short-term buffer is bank deposits and cash. |
– | 54.9% | |
| 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. |
0.4 | 1.8 | |
| 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. |
5.6% | 5.0% | |
| Long-term share of debt Long-term debt as a share of all debt. A low share means more falls due within a year. |
92.0% | 87.8% | |
Of the financial costs of 8.6 MNOK, 8.6 MNOK is reported as interest costs in the accounts.
The median and the bar refer to companies in the Morning class Micro 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.
Ringdalskogen AS has a score of 29 for 2025, rank 26,534 of 30,136 in the sector.
Strongest: Solidity: percentile 41 against peers, equity ratio 22.6% against a median of 27.9%.
Weakest: Liquidity: percentile 4 against peers, current ratio 0.03 against a median of 1.40. Growth: percentile 19 against peers, revenue growth −2.0% against a median of 3.3%.
Worth a closer look
- Consider strengthening liquidity: current liabilities are 29.2 times current assets. Based on: current ratio 0.03 (median 1.40).
- 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) 0.4 (median 1.8); financial costs as a share of debt 5.6% (median 5.0%).
- The company made a loss before tax. Are these one-off items or a pattern? Based on: profit margin −76.6% (median 24.4%).
- 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
The industry or the company: what drove the result?
In 2025 the operating margin of Ringdalskogen AS fell by 16.4 percentage points. Comparable companies rose by a median 0.8 points. So the company did 17.1 points weaker than the industry, for reasons of its own.
Over 2 year-to-year changes Ringdalskogen AS moved the same way as comparable companies 1 times. About 6% 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 | 67.7% | 46.9% | +8.2 percentage points | +0.9 percentage points | +7.3 percentage points |
| 2025 | 51.3% | 47.7% | −16.4 percentage points | +0.8 percentage points | −17.1 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 Ringdalskogen AS. The figures stand side by side; we claim no cause.
House prices (existing homes) (indeks (2015 = 100))
House prices (existing homes) rose 5.5% in 2025; the operating margin of Ringdalskogen AS fell 16.4 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| House prices (existing homes), annual average | 134.5 | 141.6 | 140.8 | 144.6 | 152.5 | 158.7 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +10.5% | +5.2% | −0.5% | +2.7% | +5.5% | +4.1% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 59.5% | 67.7% | 51.3% | – |
Source: SSB (07221, CC BY 4.0). Source
Policy rate (prosent)
Policy rate fell 0.20 percentage points in 2025; the operating margin of Ringdalskogen AS fell 16.4 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Policy rate, annual average | 0.08 | 1.32 | 3.54 | 4.50 | 4.30 | 4.17 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | −0.28 percentage points | +1.24 percentage points | +2.22 percentage points | +0.96 percentage points | −0.20 percentage points | −0.12 percentage points |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 59.5% | 67.7% | 51.3% | – |
Source: Norges Bank (IR, NLOD 2.0). Source
Construction cost index for dwellings (indeks (2015 = 100))
Construction cost index for dwellings rose 4.3% in 2025; the operating margin of Ringdalskogen AS fell 16.4 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Construction cost index for dwellings, annual average | 124.2 | 135.1 | 141.1 | 146.4 | 152.7 | 158.4 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +8.7% | +8.8% | +4.4% | +3.7% | +4.3% | +3.7% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 59.5% | 67.7% | 51.3% | – |
Source: SSB (08651, CC BY 4.0). Source
Consumer price index (indeks (2025 = 100))
Consumer price index rose 3.0% in 2025; the operating margin of Ringdalskogen AS fell 16.4 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consumer price index, annual average | 84.3 | 89.2 | 94.1 | 97.0 | 100.0 | 103.0 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +3.5% | +5.8% | +5.5% | +3.2% | +3.0% | +3.0% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 59.5% | 67.7% | 51.3% | – |
Source: SSB (14710, CC BY 4.0). Source
Wage index: real estate (indeks)
Wage index: real estate rose 5.2% in 2025; the operating margin of Ringdalskogen AS fell 16.4 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wage index: real estate, annual average | 91.7 | 94.3 | 96.8 | 103.2 | 108.5 | 111.3 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +5.2% | +2.9% | +2.6% | +6.5% | +5.2% | +2.6% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | 59.5% | 67.7% | 51.3% | – |
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
Ringdalskogen AS had an operating margin of 51.3% and an equity ratio of 22.6% in 2025, and ranks 26,534 of 30,136 in Eiendom.
From 2024 to 2025: the operating margin fell from 67.7% to 51.3%.
This text is generated automatically from the 2025 accounts.
Three simple methods
One method gives a figure: 19 MNOK.
| Method | Multiple | Estimate |
|---|---|---|
| P/E | 10.5 | not meaningful |
| EV/EBIT | 19.2 | debt above value |
| P/B | 0.7 | 19 MNOK |
| EV/EBIT: from enterprise value to equity | NOK |
|---|---|
| Enterprise value (EV) at the listed multiple | 73 MNOK |
| Enterprise value after the size adjustment | 45 MNOK |
| Less net debt (rough figure) | 141 MNOK |
| Equity value | debt above value |
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 315% 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 multiples are from the listed industry that matches the NACE code (68.2): R.E.I.T..
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
Worth a closer look
- critical
Consider strengthening liquidity: current liabilities are 29.2 times current assets.
Based on: Current ratio 0.03 (median 1.40).
- 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) 0.4 (median 1.8); Financial costs as a share of debt 5.6% (median 5.0%).
- watch
The company made a loss before tax. Are these one-off items or a pattern?
Based on: Profit margin −76.6% (median 24.4%).
Indications based on the latest annual accounts from open data. Not investment or financial advice.
Financial costs were 5.6% 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 15.2%. 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 | 35 | weight 40% |
|---|---|---|
| Solidity | 41 | weight 20% |
| Liquidity | 4 | weight 5% |
| Growth | 19 | weight 25% |
| Consistency | 22 | weight 10% |
Three goals: profitability 40%, growth 25%, resilience 35%. Why these weights?
Durability: 44 (average over 3 years)
Index version 3. Data completeness 100%: the share of the weights that had data.
Questions and answers
How profitable is Ringdalskogen AS?
The operating margin was 51.3% in 2025, against a median of 47.7% among companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector. Return on assets was 1.8%. The company made a loss before tax.
How solid is Ringdalskogen AS?
The equity ratio was 22.6% in 2025 (median 27.9%). Debt-to-equity was 3.43 (median 2.10).
What is the liquidity of Ringdalskogen AS like?
The current ratio was 0.03 in 2025 (median 1.40). Current assets did not cover current liabilities.
How does Ringdalskogen AS compare in Eiendom?
Ringdalskogen AS ranks 26,534 of 30,136 in Eiendom for 2025. Among companies in the Morning class Micro it is number 20,962 of 23,906. Revenue changed by −2.0% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Drottningborg Eiendom AS |  Cheetah |
6 MNOK | 44.1% | 48 |
| Ringdalskogen AS (this company) |  Beaver |
6 MNOK | 51.3% | 29 |
| Korskirkekvartalet AS |  Lion |
6 MNOK | 69.3% | 67 |
| Utleiemegleren Bergen Vest AS | Beaver |
6 MNOK | −2.1% | 38 |
| Ullevålsveien 14 AS | Beaver |
6 MNOK | 53.9% | 39 |
| Klementin K20 AS | Beaver |
6 MNOK | −45.0% | 21 |
| Lagunen Eiendom AS | Lion |
6 MNOK | 58.6% | 58 |
| Julius Eiendom AS | Lion |
6 MNOK | 94.5% | 78 |
| Sentrum Næringsfelleskap AS | Cheetah |
6 MNOK | 67.3% | 50 |
The selection is the closest in revenue within the same industry code. When you order, you can swap competitors. Order competitor analysis
Group accounts
The company is registered as part of a group, but we have no group accounts for it. Group accounts are filed by the parent company, and open data does not say which company that is.
Read the figures with care: a company in a group can look strong because of group contributions, or weak because dividends go up to the parent. The figures are indications, not the full picture.
Group structure · 2025
100 companies in the group according to the shareholder register for 2025. A company counts as a subsidiary when a Norwegian company owns more than half of its shares.
3log ANS owns 75% of the shares in Relog AS.
Group accounts. Relog AS for 2025: index 55 of 100, number 31 of 79 groups. See the group accounts
The group in figures
- Sectors
- Eiendom (94 companies), Teknisk tjenesteyting og forskning (2 companies), Revisjon, regnskap og rådgivning (2 companies) 98 of 100 companies in the tree have accounts with us. Sectors are sorted by the companies' own revenue, which includes sales between the group's companies.
- Employees in Norway
- 28 in all. Trondheim 28 Registered employees in the Central Coordinating Register, by the municipality of the business address. Employees may work elsewhere.
- Negative equity
- 14 companies: Nedre Kalbakkvei 82 AS, Lurahøyden Bolig AS, Butikkeiendom II Skjæveland AS, Nhp Klett AS, Kvenild Areal AS, SØ Industri II AS …
- Loss
- 44 companies: Nedre Kalbakkvei 82 AS, Login Narvik AS, Lurabyen Eiendom AS, Lurahøyden Bolig AS, Sandmoen Utvikling AS, Nye Støren Industrieiendom AS …
- Changed 2024–2025
- 1 company joined the group: Nedre Kalbakkvei 82 AS. 2 companies left, among them: Ringdal Sør AS.
A subsidiary with negative equity or a loss may be backed by the group, for example with group contributions or guarantees. It is an indication of what is worth asking about, not an assessment.
-
Relog AS
-
Nhp Eiendom AS
-
Nhp Sør AS
- Ringdalskogen AS you are here
- Enger Utvikling AS
- Danebo Utvikling AS
- Pasa Enger AS
- Relog Drift AS
- Reli OS AS
- Nhp Langhus AS
- Sandmoen Utvikling AS
- Nhp Orkanger AS
- Sundvall Eiendom II AS
- Stakkevollvn. 27 Eiendom AS
- Hallset Hage AS
- Cinclus Eiendom Haugesund AS
- and 15 more companies
-
-
Relog Energy AS
-
Org. no. 922694591
- Org. no. 819715742
-
-
The tree shows up to 4 levels below the top. Large groups have more companies than shown.
Read the figures with care: a company in a group can look strong because of group contributions, or weak because dividends go up to the parent. The figures are indications, not the full picture.
Source: the Norwegian Tax Administration's shareholder register 2025 (majority owner with more than 50 % of the shares). Voting agreements and ownership through other countries are not included.
From the Central Coordinating Register
- Org. no.
- 994339052
- Legal form
- AS · part of a group
- Sector
- Eiendom (68.200)
- Morning company class
- Micro
- Employees
- 0–4 (not registered)
- Founded
- 27 March 2009 17 years in operation
- Share capital
- 29.67 MNOK
- Business address
- Søndre gate 15, 7011 TRONDHEIM
- Municipality
- Trondheim rank 3 of 11 in KOSTRA group 12
- Latest accounts filed
- 2025
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 8 November 2026. Only names are shown.
Shareholders (2025)
- Number of shareholders
- 1 (one owner)
- Largest owner
- 100.0%
- Split
- companies 100% · private persons 0% · foreign 0%
- Owned from the same municipality
- 100%
- Group chain
-
Owned by: Nhp Sør AS (100%)
Ultimate owner: 3Log ANS
- Nhp Sør AS · 100.0%
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 10 November 2026.
Year by year · 2023–2025
| Key figure | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Index | 51 | 50 | 29 | |
| Rank | 12,747 | 14,332 | 26,534 | |
| Operating margin | 59.5% | 67.7% | 51.3% | |
| Return on assets | 1.9% | 2.6% | 1.8% | |
| Equity ratio | 36.8% | 26.7% | 22.6% | |
| Current ratio | 10.31 | 16.17 | 0.03 | |
| Revenue growth | – | 6.7% | −2.0% |
Accounts
From the Brønnøysund Register Centre, in the company's reporting currency (NOK).
| Key figure | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operating revenue | 6.1 MNOK | 6.6 MNOK | 6.4 MNOK |
| Operating profit | 3.7 MNOK | 4.4 MNOK | 3.3 MNOK |
| Profit before tax | −2.6 MNOK | −2.2 MNOK | −4.9 MNOK |
| Tax expense | −0.6 MNOK | −0.4 MNOK | −1.0 MNOK |
| Net profit | −2.0 MNOK | −1.8 MNOK | −3.9 MNOK |
| Financial expenses | 6.4 MNOK | 7.0 MNOK | 8.6 MNOK |
| Total assets | 198.5 MNOK | 181.8 MNOK | 197.9 MNOK |
| Current assets | 4.7 MNOK | 13.0 MNOK | 0.4 MNOK |
| Equity | 73.1 MNOK | 48.5 MNOK | 44.6 MNOK |
| Retained earnings | – | −1.8 MNOK | −5.7 MNOK |
| Total liabilities | 125.4 MNOK | 133.3 MNOK | 153.3 MNOK |
| Current liabilities | 0.5 MNOK | 0.8 MNOK | 12.3 MNOK |
Source: Brønnøysund Register Centre (Register of Company Accounts), fetched 10 November 2026, accounts id 6662796.
Further
Similar companies
- Mo-Bakken AS index 29, rank 26,531 · compare
- HOLDING - On AS index 29, rank 26,532 · compare
- Thomassen Eiendomsselskap AS index 29, rank 26,535 · compare
- Kirkehaugsveien 4 AS index 29, rank 26,536 · compare
- Agri Eiendom Stavanger AS index 29, rank 26,538 · compare