BackGCP Applied Technologies Overview

GCP Applied Technologies Intangible Assets

Track GCP Applied Technologies's intangible assets ($54M) with charts, peers, and YoY trends.

Get informed when a big investor buys or sells

+ Follow
Intangible Assets
$54.10M
18.77% YoYΔ $-12.50M vs prior year quarter

Peer average

Loading

GCP Applied Technologies Intangible Assets History

Loading

GCP Applied Technologies vs. peers: Intangible Assets Comparison

Loading

GCP Applied Technologies Intangible Assets Growth (YoY per quarter)

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

Loading

GCP Applied Technologies (GCP) FAQ

GCP Applied Technologies posts a intangible assets of $54M as of June 2022. That compares with $67M in the prior-year period — down 18.8% 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, GCP Applied Technologies's intangible assets was $67M. The latest reading is $54M — a 18.8% year-over-year decrease (period ending June 2022). Use the history and growth charts on this page for a longer lookback.

Intangible Assets is one piece of GCP Applied Technologies's financial statement story. At $54M, 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 GCP's intangible assets 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; GCP Applied Technologies's other metric pages and overview cover the third.

Judging GCP Applied Technologies against Consumer Discretionary peers is usually better than using a market-wide rule of thumb. Business models inside Consumer Discretionary are more comparable, which makes gaps in intangible assets easier to interpret. Start with $54M here, then scan peer and history charts to see if the gap is persistent.