Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 77.000
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 100.284
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.
Also note
- Trading liquidity is low.
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
- 51.8%
- 12 monthsHistorical calibration
- Chance the return beats the median return of its sector peers.
These assessments address different questions. Neither establishes that the displayed valuation is correct or guarantees a future return.
12-month sector-relative outlook
Median 12-month return difference versus Real Estate peers, for model gaps like this one.
- Not an absolute return forecast.
- Not a price target.
- A stock can underperform its sector and still rise.
- The sector’s historical range, not a prediction interval for this stock.
- Actual returns can fall outside it.
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
- Cash conversion, 3 yearsOperating cash flow / net profit
- 1.3358th pctile
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 28.7%94th 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 trades on UPCoM, where these tests do not apply.
The company shows very high Beneish M-Score signalling relative aggressiveness versus Vietnamese peers (M-Score 7.2662; 100th percentile vs Vietnam) with a large year-over-year rise (+2.49). Earnings-quality subcomponents point to weaknesses in accruals and margins (Earnings Quality 30.9/100; Accruals quality 6.4/100; Margin quality 0.0/100; Revenue quality 0.0/100) while liquidity and solvency screens are mixed (Altman Z-Score 5.80 — safe zone; Piotroski F-Score 7/9). Several Vietnamese-specific checks show possible non-trade receivables/prepayments elevated (Receivables outside the trade cycle 28.7% of assets, 94th percentile).
- Beneish M-Score 7.2662 (100th percentile among Vietnamese peers): this measures a model-based likelihood of earnings manipulation using eight financial ratios; the company ranks at the top vs VN peers and the M-Score rose by +2.49 year-over-year (a sharp trajectory signal). Note the -1.78 US cutoff is not VN-calibrated.
- Acrecuals/earnings quality: Earnings Quality 30.9/100 with Accruals quality 6.4/100 — this measures the reliability of reported earnings relative to cash flows; the very low accruals-quality score suggests earnings are not strongly supported by high-quality accruals.
- Margin and revenue metrics: Margin quality 0.0/100 and Revenue quality 0.0/100 — these components measure stability/quality of margins and revenue recognition patterns and here they register at the lowest score.
- High non-trade receivables/prepayments: 'Receivables outside the trade cycle' = 28.7% of total assets (94th percentile among VN non-financial firms) — this metric captures prepayments to suppliers, loans receivable and other long-term receivables which are large relative to assets.
- SGI and AQI drivers in the Beneish subcomponents: SGI (sales growth index) = 10.0000 and AQI (asset quality index) = 3.9166 — SGI measures sales growth pressure and AQI measures shifts into long-lived or hard-to-value assets; both very high values can be associated with aggressive accounting choices.
- TATA (total accruals to total assets) = 0.3521 and LVGI (leverage index) = 0.4841 — TATA at 35.21% indicates substantial accruals relative to assets; LVGI <1 typically indicates falling leverage, but combined with other signals it merits scrutiny.
- Altman Z-Score 5.80 (safe zone): this distance-to-bankruptcy model indicates low near-term insolvency risk under its formula.
- Piotroski F-Score 7/9: this measures several accounting and operating fundamentals; a 7 suggests generally strong reported fundamentals (profitability, operating cash flow, and conservative leverage/asset metrics in the Piotroski set).
- Receivables quality component in Earnings Quality = 100.0/100: within the earnings-quality decomposition this specific subscore is maximal, indicating that on the metrics used for receivable recognition the company scores strongly.
- No accumulated losses; owner's equity (excluding minority interest) positive; parent net loss years = 0: statutory indicators of solvency/past-loss history are not triggering loss-based classifications.
The capital structure is highly concentrated: Tập đoàn Vingroup (VIC) holds 86.7% (control, disclosed 2026-06-30) and a state entity (Bộ Văn Hóa, Thể Thao Và Du Lịch) holds 10.0%. The company sits inside a large listed group controlled by VIC (other major listed subsidiaries include VHM, VNB, VPL). No director-deal registrations were provided in the data supplied (director-deal registrations are exchange-registered intentions, not executed trades).
- Compare the 2025 line-item(s) for 'loans and receivables' / 'other long-term receivables' and the notes for related parties to confirm composition of the 28.7% of assets labelled 'receivables outside the trade cycle'.
- Reconcile the operating cash flow statement to net profit for FY2023–FY2025 to see drivers of the three-year cash conversion ratio (operating cash flow / net profit = 1.33) and identify major non-cash adjustments in the notes.
- Inspect the fixed-asset and intangible-asset schedules and the accounting policy note to understand components of AQI = 3.9166 (asset reclassification, capitalization policies, impairment testing).
- Review the revenue recognition note and the segment/revenue breakdown for FY2025 to understand why Revenue quality = 0.0/100 and Margin quality = 0.0/100 (look for large one-off sales, related-party sales, or timing differences).
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 1.92
- P/S
- 0.29
- ROE
- 288.1%
- ROA
- 24.0%
- EPS
- 92.451
- BVPS
- 40.070
- Gross Margin
- 37.6%
- Net Margin
- 34.4%
- D/E
- 0.20
- Current Ratio
- 1.20
- Rev Growth
- +964623.4%
- Profit Growth
- +1534.8%
- EV/EBITDA
- 0.82
- Div Yield
- 99.4%
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 167M
- Charter Capital
- 1,666B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Bất động sản
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Bất động sản
- Sub-industry
- Bất động sản
- Company Type
- CT