VLA
Công ty Cổ phần Đầu tư và Phát triển Công nghệ Văn Lang
Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 5.000
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 6.047
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.
Also note
- Net cash exceeds the market value of the company; the step from enterprise value to equity needs a check.
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
Technology companies combine high growth potential with the risk of overvaluation. This model blends DCF (60% weight, capturing long-duration growth) with a P/E sanity check (40% weight, capping speculative excess). The DCF lets growth fade more slowly than in any other sector, recognizing that tech companies can sustain competitive advantages longer. The P/E component applies a dynamic ceiling: max P/E = min(growth% x 1.5, 30), preventing runaway valuations.
Technical details
Tech firms combine high growth potential with current profitability that peers can benchmark. Pure DCF could overvalue if growth assumptions are too aggressive. The P/E blend acts as a market-calibrated anchor, while the PEG-based cap prevents paying excessive multiples.
DCF: 10-year FCF projection with growth capped at 20%, fading more slowly than in any other sector toward the sector's long-run growth rate. P/E: 5-year median P/E capped at dynamic ceiling (growth x 1.5, max 30). Blend: 60% DCF + 40% P/E.
Technology and IT companies where high growth potential must be balanced against the risk of speculative overvaluation.
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
- −10.873rd pctile
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 0.0%4th 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 several signals consistent with aggressive earnings patterns versus Vietnamese peers: a Beneish M-Score of -1.1535 (86th percentile among Vietnamese peers) and a year-over-year rise of +0.22. Key driving inputs include a high DSRI of 1.8476 (suggesting rapid growth in receivables or revenue recognition pressure) and a positive TATA of 0.2108 (accruals/total assets). Offsetting strengths include a high Altman Z-Score of 9.37 (well inside the ‘safe’ zone for bankruptcy distance), a neutral Piotroski F-Score of 5/9, and no statutory loss tests met in the audited statements.
- Beneish M-Score = -1.1535: measures the likelihood of earnings manipulation using eight variables; this level sits at the 86th percentile among Vietnamese peers (higher percentile = more aggressive accounting vs VN peers). The M-Score rose by +0.22 year-over-year, indicating an upward movement in the manipulation signal.
- DSRI = 1.8476: the Days Sales Receivable Index compares receivables (and revenue recognition) to prior period; a value well above 1 implies receivables or days sales outstanding grew materially relative to revenue, a common early signal of revenue recognition pressure.
- TATA = 0.2108: Total Accruals to Total Assets is positive and sizable (0.2108), indicating net accruals (profit not matched by cash) are a material proportion of assets.
- Earnings Quality Score = 7.6/100 with component failures: Accruals quality 30.5/100, Cash conversion 0.0/100, Receivables quality 0.0/100, Margin quality 0.0/100, Revenue quality 0.0/100 — these component scores signal weak cash conversion of reported profit, poor receivables quality, and low reliability of reported margins and revenue measures.
- Cash conversion (3-year operating cash flow / net profit) = -10.87 (3rd percentile vs VN peers): net profit is not converting into operating cash over three years, a serious accounting/cash-generation disconnect.
- Receivables outside the trade cycle = 0.0% of total assets (4th percentile vs VN peers): unusually low reported non-trade receivables can reflect classification choices (e.g., hiding related-party loans inside other balances) or genuine absence of such items; the combination with a high DSRI suggests receivables growth concentrated in trade-receivables lines.
- SGAI = 1.0284 and DEPI = 0.9375: slightly higher selling/general/admin relative to sales (SGAI >1) while depreciation index <1 (DEPI <1) — mixed operating-cost signals that can accompany accounting shifts in expenses/estimations.
- Altman Z-Score = 9.37: this score measures bankruptcy distance; 9.37 is well inside the ‘safe’ zone, indicating a large cushion against financial-distress metrics embedded in the formula.
- Piotroski F-Score = 5/9: this composite of profitability, leverage/liquidity, and operating efficiency is neutral (neither strongly healthy nor weak).
- GMI = 0.9286 and SGI = 0.8114: Gross Margin Index <1 indicates gross margins improved year-over-year, and Sales Growth Index <1 shows sales contracted year-over-year; improving margins and shrinking sales can be legitimate business outcomes rather than aggressive revenue growth.
- AQI = 0.0132 and LVGI = 0.4580: Asset quality index low (AQI near zero) suggests no large reclassification to non-current assets relative to peers in the AQI measure; LVGI (leverage index <1) suggests leverage did not increase sharply under the index's definition.
Ownership is highly concentrated among individuals: the top five holders are Đặng Trọng Khang 25.0%, Nguyễn Thành Tiến 11.5%, Nguyễn Hữu Thuận 10.0%, Nguyễn Thu Hà 9.4%, and Lê Anh Nguyên 5.4% (top five = 61.3%). No director-deal registrations were provided in the input (director-deal registrations, when present on exchange records, reflect intended dealings rather than completed trades).
- Compare the year-over-year change in trade receivables (and days sales outstanding) in the balance-sheet and revenue notes to the DSRI drivers (note or schedule showing receivables ageing and revenue by customer segment).
- Reconcile operating cash flow and profit in the cash-flow statement and management discussion: check the components of operating cash flow (working-capital movements, non-cash items) to understand the -10.87 three-year cash-conversion metric.
- Inspect the related-party transactions and loans/advances notes for any transfers, prepayments, or intercompany receivables that could explain receivables dynamics or low disclosed 'receivables outside the trade cycle'.
- Examine the audit report and notes on accounting estimates (depreciation policy, useful lives, impairment testing) to contextualise the DEPI <1 and any discretionary expense/estimate choices reflected in accruals (TATA = 0.2108).
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 0.47
- P/S
- 1.77
- ROE
- 2.0%
- ROA
- 1.8%
- EPS
- 219
- BVPS
- 11.247
- Gross Margin
- 73.3%
- Net Margin
- 7.3%
- D/E
- 0.04
- Current Ratio
- 17.87
- Rev Growth
- −18.9%
- Profit Growth
- +69.3%
- EV/EBITDA
- —
- Div Yield
- —
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 4.0M
- Charter Capital
- 40.0B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Công nghệ Thông tin
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Phần mềm & Dịch vụ Máy tính
- Sub-industry
- Phần mềm
- Company Type
- CT