Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 260.000
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 240.465
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
- The closing price is too old for comparison.
- 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 4 Dec 2025
- 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
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 3.5%59th pctile
- Accumulated losses / paid-in capitalUndistributed earnings below zero
- 0.44×
- 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 mixed accounting signals: the Beneish M-Score at -1.6494 (76th percentile vs Vietnamese peers) and a year-over-year increase of +0.82 indicate relatively more aggressive accounting behavior versus peers and recent deterioration in the manipulation-related score; earnings-quality metrics are weak overall (26.5/100) driven by very poor cash-conversion, margin and revenue quality. Offsetting these concerns, the Altman Z-Score is 4.04 (in the ‘safe’ zone for bankruptcy distance) and Piotroski F-Score is low at 3/9, showing weak operating fundamentals.
- Beneish M-Score = -1.6494. The M-Score is a model that flags earnings manipulation risk; the company's score sits above the US -1.78 cutoff but the Vietnamese context matters. This company ranks at the 76th percentile among Vietnamese peers (higher = more aggressive accounting versus VN peers), and the M-Score rose by +0.82 year-over-year, indicating the most recent change toward more aggressive signals.
- DSRI = 1.1682. Days-sales in receivables index >1 suggests receivables are rising faster than sales (a signal sometimes associated with revenue recognition pressure).
- AQI = 1.4717. Asset quality index >1 indicates reclassification toward less conservative asset categories (for example more receivables, other noncurrent assets or capitalized items).
- GMI = 1.8421. Gross margin index >1 means gross margins have deteriorated year-over-year, which can create incentives to manage earnings.
- TATA = 0.0378 (total accruals to total assets). While not extremely large, positive TATA indicates accrual-based earnings rather than cash-based, and combined with very poor cash metrics it merits attention.
- Earnings Quality Score = 26.5/100 with Cash conversion = 0.0/100, Margin quality = 0.0/100 and Revenue quality = 0.0/100. These specific zeros indicate the company scores at the bottom on cash conversion, margin sustainability and revenue quality in the applied scoring framework.
- Receivables quality = 26.4/100 and Receivables outside the trade cycle = 3.5% of total assets (59th percentile). The receivables-quality metric is weak and 3.5% of assets are receivables classified outside the trade cycle (prepayments to suppliers, loans receivable and other long-term receivables), which raises questions about collectability and classification.
- Piotroski F-Score = 3/9. A score of 3 indicates weak fundamentals across profitability, leverage/liquidity and operating efficiency tests.
- Director-deal registrations: net registered volume = +66.05% of shares outstanding between 2025-10-30 and 2026-10-30, with 0 sale registrations and 1 purchase registration (one trader registered to buy 2,000,000 shares). Registrations are intentions filed with the exchange and are not executed trades; the large net registered volume is notable as an insider disclosure signal.
- Altman Z-Score = 4.04. This places the company in the traditional ‘safe’ zone for bankruptcy distance in the Altman model, suggesting low near-term bankruptcy risk by that metric.
- Accruals quality = 84.9/100. This relatively high sub-score indicates accrual items (the relation of accounting earnings to cash flows) are of comparatively better quality than other earnings-quality dimensions.
- LVGI = 1.0097 (leverage index ≈1). A leverage index near 1 implies leverage has been relatively stable year-over-year.
- SGI = 0.8175 and SGAI = 0.8260 (sales growth index <1 and SGA index <1). These indicate sales growth slowed (SGI <1) and selling/general/admin expenses did not expand relative to sales, reducing one pressure that can lead to aggressive expense capitalization or classification.
- Statutory loss tests: none met under Decree 155/2020 Art.120(1)(e) as amended by Decree 245/2025, and owner's equity (excluding minority interest) is positive. The published statements therefore do not meet the exchange’s statutory loss criteria for cancellation.
Ownership is highly concentrated: an individual, Trần Quang Đức, holds 66.0% of shares, and VNE (Tổng Công ty Cổ phần Xây dựng điện Việt Nam) holds 18.6%. There is a group link: the company holds 0.2% of VNE, while VNE holds 18.6% of this company (cross-holding). Such concentrated control and cross-holdings can affect related-party transactions and disclosures; additionally, one large insider registered to buy 2,000,000 shares during the reporting window (registrations are intentions, not executed trades).
- Compare the FY2025 note on related-party transactions to the 3.5% of total assets classified as receivables outside the trade cycle (prepayments to suppliers, loans receivable and other long-term receivables) to identify counterparties and terms.
- Reconcile the cash-flow statement operating cash flow to reported profit and TATA = 0.0378 (total accruals to total assets) to see which accruals drive the gap and whether they are recurring.
- Inspect the revenue recognition note and detailed sales schedules for signs behind DSRI = 1.1682 (days-sales in receivables index), specifically aging of trade receivables and any large movements in the top customers.
- Review the auditor’s report and the statutory loss-related disclosures to confirm the published statements did not meet the statutory cancellation tests referenced (Decree 155/2020 Art.120(1)(e) as amended).
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 78.65
- P/S
- 13.20
- ROE
- 1.1%
- ROA
- 0.2%
- EPS
- 35
- BVPS
- 3.306
- Gross Margin
- 5.4%
- Net Margin
- 0.2%
- D/E
- 2.86
- Current Ratio
- 1.08
- Rev Growth
- −18.2%
- Profit Growth
- −82.9%
- EV/EBITDA
- 944.52
- Div Yield
- —
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 3.0M
- Charter Capital
- 30.3B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Xây dựng và Vật liệu
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Xây dựng và Vật liệu
- Sub-industry
- Xây dựng
- Company Type
- CT