3 Leger Da
DAActiveOrg 993231223Indre Arna-Vegen 175, 5261 Indre ArnaGeneral medical practice activities· NACE 8621Est. 2008 · 17 years old5 employees
Loading company…
Riskpilot← Back to searchSign inGet full access3 Leger Da is a Norwegian DA based in Indre Arna, operating in the General medical practice activities sector. Incorporated in 2008, the company has 5 employees and reported revenue of NOK 2.1m in its latest annual filing.
| Revenue | 2.1M NOK | +5% |
| EBITDA | 0.1M NOK | +79% |
| Net profit | 0M NOK | — |
| Total assets | 0.2M NOK | +8% |
| Equity | 0M NOK | — |
| Employees | 5 | — |
In its most recent annual report (2013), 3 Leger Da reported revenue of NOK 2.1m, an increase of 5% on the year before. The figures on this page draw on 2 annual filings covering 2012 to 2013. The bottom line showed a break-even result, and the EBITDA margin stood at 2.4%.
At the end of 2013, equity financed 0% of the balance sheet, and current assets covered short-term debt 0.5 times.
| Item | 2013 | 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 2,052 | 1,948 |
| Staff expenses | -1,207 | -1,133 |
| EBITDA | 50 | 28 |
| Depreciation & amort. | -50 | -28 |
| EBIT | 0 | 0 |
| Net financials | 0 | 0 |
| Profit before tax | 0 | 0 |
| Tax | -0 | -0 |
| Net profit | 0 | 0 |
| Item | 2013 | 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| Total assets | 234 | 217 |
| Equity | 0 | 0 |
| Long-term debt | 0 | 0 |
| Short-term debt | 234 | 217 |
| Total debt | 234 | 217 |
28 financial ratios from the latest filing, each graded against companies in the same industry.
The gross result as a share of revenue — how much of the revenue is left after variable costs to cover the company's fixed costs.
EBIT as a share of revenue — the share of revenue remaining as earnings once all operating costs are covered. A key measure of earning power.
The profit for the year as a share of revenue — the company's ability to turn revenue into profit.
Net profit as a percentage of total assets — the return generated on the capital employed.
EBIT relative to total assets — the company's earning power before the effects of tax and financial leverage.
Shows how strongly fixed costs weigh on the gross result — a high ratio means fixed costs take only a small bite out of the earnings from basic operations.
Net profit as a percentage of equity — the return the owners earned on their invested capital this year.
Profit relative to net assets (total assets minus total debt) — the ability to generate earnings from the net asset base alone.
Current assets relative to short-term debt — the ability to settle short-term obligations with current assets alone. Around 150% is considered satisfactory from a credit perspective.
Current assets excluding inventory relative to short-term debt — whether the most liquid assets alone can cover the short-term obligations. A value of 1 or above signals a healthy liquidity position.
Cash relative to short-term debt — the ability to repay short-term obligations with cash alone.
Current assets relative to equity — an indicator of the balance-sheet structure and of the company's short- and long-term financing. The healthy level is highly industry-dependent.
Fixed assets relative to long-term capital (equity plus long-term liabilities). Below 100% means the long-term capital finances more than just the fixed assets — a healthier liquidity position.
Cash flow relative to profit — the ability to convert reported profits into accessible cash.
Equity as a share of total assets — the ability to absorb losses. Around 40% is considered satisfactory from a credit perspective.
Total debt relative to the balance-sheet total — the share of the assets financed by debt rather than equity.
Profit relative to debt — the ability to create earnings while operating with debt.
EBITDA relative to debt — how much operating earnings are available to service the debt.
Financial expenses relative to total liabilities — the effective interest rate the company pays on its debt.
The return on assets minus the interest rate on debt. Positive means the company benefits from operating with debt; negative means the debt makes it worse off.
Debt relative to equity — the company's leverage. A higher value means heavier reliance on debt financing.
Total liabilities relative to equity — whether the company operates primarily on borrowed capital or on its own.
The ability to pay the interest on the company's debt out of its earnings.
Revenue relative to total assets — the ability to generate revenue from the asset base.
The size of this year's increase or decrease in the company's debt.
Revenue relative to inventory — how many times a year the inventory is sold and replaced. A low value can indicate weak sales or excess inventory.
Total equity relative to the capital the owners contributed — how the equity has developed from its starting point.
The size of this year's increase or decrease in the company's equity.
| Name | Role | Member since |
|---|---|---|
| Current (1) | ||
AT Chief Executive Officer | Chief Executive Officer | 2026 |
AD Chief Executive Officer | Chief Executive Officer | 2018 – 2026 |
No data on file.
| Shareholder | Type | Ownership | Votes | Registered |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Individual | 0% | 0% | 2019 | |
| Individual | 0% | 0% | 2019 | |
| Individual | 0% | 0% | 2019 | |
| Individual | 0% | 0% | 2019 | |
| Individual | 0% | 0% | 2024 | |
| Individual | 0% | 0% | 2022 |
| Person | Role here | Other companies |
|---|---|---|
| Alexander Torkildsen Fosshaug | Chief Executive Officer | 3 companies |
| Alf David Antoni Myklebust | Chief Executive Officer | 2 companies |