Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 10.400
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 11.399
Last close × (1 + calibrated gap / 100)
Earnings-capitalised value
Not available: the company reported a loss last year or its shares have too short a price history.
How it is calculated
- 1Measure the gap
Between the model and the last close.
- 2Check the record2015–2024
What gaps of that size went on to earn over the following year.
- 3Apply to the close
That return is applied to the last close.
Keep in mind
- For illustration only: not a validated forecast.
- No uncertainty range: the estimate is a single figure.
- Older record: it has not been re-measured on the current data.
Why it needs review
- Trading liquidity is below the comparison threshold.
- Under financial distress the model falls back to book value.
This estimate remains visible for checking its calculation. Its inputs require review before using it in a stock comparison. The model comparison behind this value needs review. The estimate does not remove the data limitations listed above.
Comparison assessed 3 Nov 2026Valid through 2 Dec 2026
- Model reliability
- Very Low
- Model fitInput stabilityRisk checks
- High requires the model’s diagnostic criteria to be met.
- Probability of outperforming peers
- Not assessed
- A separate peer-outperformance probability is unavailable for this valuation.
These assessments address different questions. Neither establishes that the displayed valuation is correct or guarantees a future return.
Valuation Breakdown
Construction and industrial firms have lumpy, project-based earnings that swing with the building cycle. Order books fill and empty, so a single year's profit is a poor guide to normal earning power. This model values them on through-cycle EBITDA: a 7-year median EBITDA ("mid-cycle" earnings) times a fair EV/EBITDA multiple, less net debt. It mirrors the cyclical model.
Technical details
Project-based revenue is lumpy and asset-backed. EV/EBITDA is capital-structure-neutral and undistorted by depreciation policy, and mid-cycle EBITDA normalizes across the building cycle so a firm isn't overvalued at a peak or undervalued at a trough.
Computes 7-year median EBITDA and a fair EV/EBITDA from the firm's own history blended toward the construction-sector median. Net debt is taken directly from the balance sheet (short- plus long-term borrowings minus cash and short-term investments, which hold most term deposits). Fair Value = (Mid-Cycle EBITDA x Fair EV/EBITDA) - Net Debt.
Construction & materials and industrial goods & services companies with lumpy, project-based revenue and asset-backed balance sheets.
We take the model’s gap to the last close, read what gaps of that size went on to earn over the following year in our 2015 to 2024 record, and apply that to the last close.
Last close × (1 + calibrated gap / 100)
Earnings Quality
Financial Forensics
Ranked vs Vietnamese peers. The −1.78 Beneish cutoff is US-calibrated; ~28% of VN stocks exceed it.
Checks measured on Vietnamese companies · FY2025
- Cash conversion, 3 yearsOperating cash flow / net profit
- 31.0599th pctile
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 9.5%80th pctile
- Accumulated losses / paid-in capitalUndistributed earnings below zero
- None
- Consecutive years of net lossProfit after tax of the parent
- 0
- Owner's equityWithout the non-controlling interest
- Positive
Percentiles rank each fiscal year against Vietnamese non-financial companies (0 lowest, 100 highest). Over FY2015-2024, low cash conversion and a large share of receivables outside the trade cycle came before more listing trouble and more net losses the next year.
Statutory loss tests (Decree 155/2020/NĐ-CP, Art. 120(1)(e), amended by Decree 245/2025/NĐ-CP): a HOSE or HNX listing is cancelled when the audited annual statements show net losses in each of the latest 3 years, accumulated losses above the paid-in charter capital, or negative owner's equity. Read here from the annual statements as the data vendor publishes them.
The company shows multiple accounting signals consistent with aggressive revenue/receivables recognition: a very high Beneish M‑Score of 3.7264 (Vietnam peer percentile 99th) driven by an extreme DSRI of 10.0000 and weak revenue/margin components (SGI 0.5048, SGAI 1.7417, DEPI 1.0508). At the same time cash-based measures are poor: Altman Z‑Score is 0.55 (distress zone) and the three‑year cash conversion ratio is 31.05 (99th percentile among Vietnamese peers), while the Piotroski F‑Score is middling at 5/9. Statutory loss tests reported for FY2025 are not met.
- Beneish M‑Score = 3.7264 (measures likelihood of earnings manipulation relative to Beniesh model inputs); this is at the 99th percentile vs Vietnamese peers, indicating the company is among the most aggressive fiscal reporters in the local sample.
- DSRI = 10.0000 (Days Sales Receivable Index measures growth of receivables relative to sales) — an extreme value suggesting receivables or revenue timing changes are a principal driver of the M‑Score.
- Receivables outside the trade cycle = 9.5% of total assets (80th percentile) (this measures prepayments, loans receivable and other receivables not directly from normal trade), consistent with the high DSRI and indicating material non-trade receivables on the balance sheet.
- Earnings‑quality sub-scores: Receivables quality 0/100, Margin quality 0/100, Revenue quality 0/100 (these measure quality of receivables, stability of margins, and persistence/recognizability of revenue) — all scored at the lowest band.
- Three‑year cash conversion (operating cash flow / net profit) = 31.05 (99th percentile) (measures whether reported profit converts to cash) — low conversion consistent with profit not turning into cash.
- Altman Z‑Score = 0.55 (measures distance to bankruptcy; 'distress zone') — indicates weak aggregate balance‑sheet solvency in a standard default/distress model.
- TATA (Total Accruals to Total Assets) = -0.2693 (measures accrual-based earnings adjustments) — a large negative accrual suggests unusual non‑cash items affecting profit.
- Accruals quality = 100/100 (measures the reliability and magnitude of accruals) and Cash conversion = 100/100 (measures short‑term cash flow conversion) in the Earnings Quality Score — these indicate reported accruals and near‑term cash flows have some supportive metrics despite other concerns.
- Piotroski F‑Score = 5/9 (measures nine fundamental signals of improving or deteriorating firm health) — a neutral score, not showing a clear deterioration across profitability, leverage/liquidity, or operating efficiency tests.
- No accumulated losses and owner's equity (excluding minority interest) positive — the balance sheet shows retained earnings are not negative and equity remains on the positive side.
- Statutory loss tests (Decree 155/2020 Art.120(1)(e) as amended) — none met for FY2025 (these are exchange delisting triggers present in audited statements).
Ownership is concentrated: two largest holders are individuals and a single‑member investment company (Phạm Hùng 17.0%, Công Ty TNHH Một Thành Viên Đầu Tư Thanh Long 16.9%), with additional insiders/strategic holders (Võ Ngọc Hùng 8.2%, Hanshin Engineering 6.0%). The top five collectively hold a large share, which implies concentrated control and potential related‑party transactions common in Vietnamese group structures.
- Compare the year‑end trade receivables and the note(s) labelled 'Prepayments', 'Loans to related parties' and 'Other long‑term receivables' in FY2025 — reconcile the 9.5% of total assets figure to line items.
- Review the revenue recognition note and the receivables ageing schedule to verify how much revenue is matched to receivables growth that produced DSRI = 10.0000.
- Reconcile operating cash flow to profit in the consolidated cash flow statement and the notes to confirm the three‑year cash conversion ratio of 31.05 (compare OCF and net profit for the three‑year span).
- Inspect related‑party disclosures and the schedule of balances with group companies for any material prepayments, advances or non‑trade receivables that could explain high receivables‑outside‑trade‑cycle and the negative TATA.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 0.68
- P/S
- 30.30
- ROE
- 6.8%
- ROA
- 2.0%
- EPS
- 1.112
- BVPS
- 16.998
- Gross Margin
- 40.0%
- Net Margin
- 292.7%
- D/E
- 0.71
- Current Ratio
- 1.23
- Rev Growth
- −50.4%
- Profit Growth
- +7205.8%
- EV/EBITDA
- —
- Div Yield
- —
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 17.6M
- Charter Capital
- 176B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Xây dựng và Vật liệu
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Xây dựng và Vật liệu
- Sub-industry
- Xây dựng
- Company Type
- CT