CQN
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 — CQN
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2020
CQN exhibits significant financial red flags, particularly with a Beneish M-Score of 0.4482, indicating potential earnings manipulation. The earnings quality score of 0.0/100 further underscores severe issues with accruals, cash conversion, and revenue recognition.
- Beneish M-Score of 0.4482 exceeds the manipulation threshold of -1.78, suggesting potential earnings manipulation.
- Earnings Quality Score of 0.0/100 indicates extremely poor earnings quality across all metrics, including accruals and cash conversion.
- SGAI of 3.2271 suggests excessive selling, which may indicate distress or lack of demand for products.
- The presence of a dominant institutional shareholder, Công ty Cổ phần Tập đoàn T&T, holding 77.8% of shares, could imply stability in governance.
The high concentration of ownership by a single institution (77.8%) raises concerns about governance and accountability, as minority shareholders have limited influence.
Investors should approach CQN with caution, considering divestment or avoiding new investments until a clearer picture of financial health and governance emerges.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for CQN — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate