Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 2.570
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 3.347
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.
- The model uses profit in place of cash flow, which was not available.
- The latest cash flow is zero or negative.
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
- 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
Developers often carry land banks at historical cost under VAS, so book value can understate asset value. This model blends two approaches: an RNAV proxy (book value with its property share marked up 1.5×) weighted 40%, and a DCF on normalized cash flows weighted 60%. Highly leveraged firms receive a +2% WACC penalty.
Technical details
RE developers carry large land inventories at historical cost; cash flows depend on project delivery timing. RNAV captures hidden land value, while DCF captures earnings power. The leverage screen guards against over-leveraged developers.
RNAV proxy: the property share of BVPS (investment property, fixed assets and inventories over total assets) × 1.5 plus the rest at book, or 1.25× all of book when that share is 10% or less or unknown, cut by up to 50% as D/E rises above 2. DCF: 5-year projection on median cash flow with CAPM-derived WACC. If D/E > 3 or interest coverage < 1.5, WACC is increased by 2%. Final value = 40% RNAV + 60% DCF.
Property developers and real estate firms with significant land banks recorded at below-market historical cost.
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)
DCF Sensitivity
Illustrative calibrated values from the standalone DCF scenarios below, anchored to the same last close. These scenarios leave out the other parts of a blended model and do not reproduce the headline value.
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
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 56.5%99th pctile
- Accumulated losses / paid-in capitalUndistributed earnings below zero
- 0.84×
- 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's Beneish M-Score is 0.0265 (94th percentile vs Vietnamese peers) with a year-over-year rise of +7.77, signalling an unusually large upward shift in the model's indicators relative to peers rather than an absolute US-calibrated cutoff. Earnings-quality indicators are weak overall (Earnings Quality 28.8/100) with especially poor cash-conversion and margin/revenue-quality components, and the Altman Z-Score of -1.23 places the company in the model's distress zone while the Piotroski F-Score is middling at 5/9.
- Beneish M-Score 0.0265 (94th percentile among Vietnamese peers): measures eight variables indicative of earnings manipulation tendencies; the high peer percentile shows the company scores more aggressively on these metrics than most Vietnamese peers.
- M-Score year-over-year change +7.77: measures the change in the composite Beneish score from the prior year; a large positive change indicates a material shift in the underlying accounting signals compared with last year.
- GMI (Gross Margin Index) = 2.1395: part of the M-Score family, this measures deterioration in gross margins (values >1 suggest worsening gross margins), here indicating sustained margin pressure.
- DEPI (Depreciation Index) = 1.3307: measures changes in the rate of depreciation (values >1 can indicate slower depreciation or policy changes that inflate profits); this elevated value suggests a move that increases reported profits via depreciation timing.
- TATA (Total Accruals to Total Assets) = 0.1927: measures accrual intensity (higher values imply greater accruals relative to assets); 19.27% is a material accrual level and contributes to the lower accruals-quality score (35.3/100).
- Cash conversion 0.0/100 and Margin quality 0.0/100: cash conversion measures ability to turn profits into cash; 0 indicates very weak operating cash flow relative to earnings. Margin and revenue-quality 0.0 indicate deterioration in profit margins and low-quality revenue patterns.
- Altman Z-Score = -1.23 (distress zone): the Z-Score model's composite suggests a short bankruptcy distance by that model's construction.
- Receivables outside the trade cycle = 56.5% of total assets (99th percentile): measures amounts classified as receivables/prepayments/loans outside normal trade receivables; at 56.5% of assets this is extremely large versus Vietnamese peers and may reflect significant prepayments, loans to related parties or other non-trade claims.
- Accumulated losses = 0.84x paid-in capital: measures the scale of retained losses relative to contributed capital; accumulated losses at 84% of paid-in capital show a substantial historical deficit position.
- Receivables quality 100.0/100: measures the composition and collectibility of receivables; a perfect score indicates the company's recognized trade receivables (as classified) are of high reported quality relative to the scoring rules.
- AQI (Asset Quality Index) = 0.9883: part of the M-Score family, values near 1 suggest little deterioration in asset quality per that metric; here AQI just below 1 is not signalling asset-quality deterioration via that index.
- SGAI (Sales, General & Administrative Index) = 0.0372: very low SGAI indicates little relative increase in SGA expenses per the M-Score subcomponent (values >1 would indicate rising SGA share), so SGA pressure is not evident via this index.
- Piotroski F-Score = 5/9: a neutral score on fundamentals (measures profitability, leverage/liquidity, and operating efficiency); the company is neither strongly deteriorating nor strongly improving on those nine binary signals.
Ownership is relatively dispersed among institutional holders: KITMC Worldwide Vietnam RSP Balanced Fund 6.2%, Deutsche Bank / Deutsche Asset Management 6.0%, the Ho Chi Minh City State Financial Investment Company 6.0%, Vietnam Equity Holding 4.6% and Red River Holding 4.5%. No single majority owner is listed; a state-owned financial investor holds a meaningful 6.0% stake, which can be relevant in the Vietnamese context for group or policy relationships.
- Compare the FY2025 note or schedule that breaks down 'receivables and prepayments' with the related-party disclosures to identify how much of the 56.5% of total assets classified as receivables outside the trade cycle are loans to related parties, long-term receivables, or prepayments to suppliers.
- Reconcile the components of total accruals in the cash-flow statement and the consolidated statements (operating profit vs cash from operations) to verify the TATA ratio of 0.1927 and to trace drivers of the 0.0/100 cash-conversion score.
- Inspect the depreciation and fixed-asset policy notes to explain DEPI = 1.3307 (changes in depreciation rates or useful lives) and confirm any policy changes or revaluations in FY2025.
- Review the statement of changes in equity and the retained earnings / accumulated losses line to confirm accumulated losses = 0.84x paid-in capital and to verify the parent profit (net loss) history reported (0 consecutive years of parent net loss up to FY2025).
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 1.66
- P/S
- 2.41
- ROE
- 87.0%
- ROA
- 15.8%
- EPS
- 963
- BVPS
- 1.588
- Gross Margin
- 20.0%
- Net Margin
- 88.2%
- D/E
- 0.00
- Current Ratio
- 0.93
- Rev Growth
- +165.6%
- Profit Growth
- +136.3%
- EV/EBITDA
- —
- Div Yield
- —
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 113M
- Charter Capital
- 1,127B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Bất động sản
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Bất động sản
- Sub-industry
- Bất động sản
- Company Type
- CT