BackBrand Group (M.G) Overview

Brand Group (M.G) Receivables

Track Brand Group (M.G)'s receivables ($570M) with charts, peers, and YoY trends.

Get informed when a big investor buys or sells

+ Follow
Receivables
$568.57M
↑ 63.67% YoYΔ $221.17M vs prior year quarter

Peer trimmed avg / median

Loading

Brand Group (M.G) Receivables History

Loading

Brand Group (M.G) vs. peers: Receivables Comparison

Loading

Brand Group (M.G) Receivables Growth (YoY per quarter)

Latest change versus the prior comparable period (same company).

Loading

Balance Sheet Breakdown

Current CashShort Term InvestmentsReceivablesInventoryOther Current AssetsCurrent AssetsLong Term InvestmentsProperty Plant EquipmentGoodwillIntangible AssetsOther AssetsTotal AssetsNet Tangible AssetsAccounts PayableOther Current LiabilitiesTotal Current LiabilitiesLong Term DebtOther LiabilitiesMinority InterestTotal Liabilities

Brand Group (M.G) (BRND.TA) FAQ

Brand Group (M.G) posts a receivables of $570M as of June 2026. That compares with $350M in the prior-year period — up 63.7% year over year. Comparing that reading with peers and prior periods is usually more useful than looking at the number in isolation.

In the prior comparable period, Brand Group (M.G)'s receivables was $350M. The latest reading is $570M — a 63.7% year-over-year increase (period ending June 2026). Use the history and growth charts on this page for a longer lookback.

Receivables is one piece of Brand Group (M.G)'s financial statement story. At $570M, it should be interpreted next to related metrics — for example revenue with costs, assets with liabilities, or income with margins. Stockcircle links those related pages so you can move from this number to the surrounding context quickly.

Context for BRND.TA's receivables usually means three checks: (1) trend versus prior periods, (2) level versus peers, and (3) consistency with growth and profitability. This page covers the first two; Brand Group (M.G)'s other metric pages and overview cover the third.

Judging Brand Group (M.G) against Industrials peers is usually better than using a market-wide rule of thumb. Business models inside Industrials are more comparable, which makes gaps in receivables easier to interpret. Start with $570M here, then scan peer and history charts to see if the gap is persistent.