BCC
ConstructionValuation Breakdown
Construction and industrial firms have characteristics of both cyclical businesses (lumpy project-based revenue) and growth companies (expanding order books). This model blends two approaches 50/50: EV/EBITDA valuation (captures current earning power relative to peers) and FCF-based DCF (captures future cash generation potential). If EV/EBITDA produces a negative value (debt exceeds enterprise value), only DCF is used.
Valuation Track Record
Retroactive intrinsic value vs actual close price — BCC
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
BCC exhibits a Beneish M-Score of -1.6969, indicating a low likelihood of earnings manipulation, as it is above the manipulation threshold of -1.78. However, the high DSRI of 1.6775 and low earnings quality score of 61.5/100 raise concerns about revenue recognition and overall earnings quality.
- High DSRI of 1.6775 suggests potential issues with inventory management or sales growth not matching receivables growth.
- Earnings quality score of 61.5/100 is below the optimal threshold, particularly driven by a 0.0/100 score in both eq_margin and eq_revenue, indicating significant concerns in profit margins and revenue recognition.
- Beneish M-Score of -1.6969 indicates a lower likelihood of earnings manipulation.
- Strong cash conversion score of 100.0/100 suggests effective cash flow management.
The ownership structure is heavily concentrated with Tổng Công ty Xi măng Việt Nam holding 73.1%, which may lead to governance risks and lack of minority shareholder protection.
Investors should closely monitor BCC's revenue recognition practices and consider conducting further due diligence on management's operational strategies, particularly in light of the elevated DSRI and low earnings quality metrics.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for BCC — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate