DDB
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 — DDB
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
DDB exhibits a moderate risk profile with a Beneish M-Score of -1.4911, indicating no immediate signs of earnings manipulation. However, the high DSRI of 2.6025 and low revenue quality score raise concerns about potential revenue recognition issues.
- DSRI of 2.6025 indicates significant growth in receivables relative to sales, suggesting possible revenue recognition issues.
- Revenue quality score of 0.0/100 raises concerns about the sustainability of reported revenues.
- Earnings Quality Score of 74.4/100 indicates generally good earnings quality, particularly strong cash conversion at 100.0/100.
- Low SGAI of 0.7647 suggests effective cost management relative to sales growth.
The top shareholders are individuals with significant stakes, which may lead to concentrated decision-making and potential governance risks. However, the absence of institutional investors may limit external oversight.
Investors should closely monitor DDB's revenue recognition practices and consider conducting further due diligence on cash flow sustainability before making investment decisions.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for DDB — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate