CIG
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 — CIG
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
CIG exhibits significant red flags indicating potential earnings manipulation, as evidenced by a Beneish M-Score of 1.9196, which exceeds the manipulation threshold of -1.78. The earnings quality score of 36.5/100, particularly low cash conversion metrics, raises further concerns about the sustainability of reported earnings.
- Beneish M-Score of 1.9196 indicates likely earnings manipulation.
- Earnings Quality Score of 36.5/100 suggests poor earnings quality, with cash conversion at 0.0/100.
- DSRI of 0.7099 indicates lower risk of revenue manipulation through inventory adjustments.
- Receivables quality score of 100.0/100 suggests effective management of accounts receivable.
The top shareholders are individuals with significant stakes, with the largest holding at 24.3%, indicating potential concentration risk and governance challenges typical in Vietnamese SOEs.
Investors should approach CIG with caution, closely monitoring future earnings reports and cash flow statements. Consider diversifying investments to mitigate risks associated with potential earnings manipulation.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for CIG — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate