Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 21.100
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 20.324
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.
- Under financial distress the model falls back to book value.
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 3 Dec 2026
- Model reliability
- Very 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
Construction and industrial firms have lumpy, project-based earnings that swing with the building cycle. Order books fill and empty, so a single year's profit is a poor guide to normal earning power. This model values them on through-cycle EBITDA: a 7-year median EBITDA ("mid-cycle" earnings) times a fair EV/EBITDA multiple, less net debt. It mirrors the cyclical model.
Technical details
Project-based revenue is lumpy and asset-backed. EV/EBITDA is capital-structure-neutral and undistorted by depreciation policy, and mid-cycle EBITDA normalizes across the building cycle so a firm isn't overvalued at a peak or undervalued at a trough.
Computes 7-year median EBITDA and a fair EV/EBITDA from the firm's own history blended toward the construction-sector median. Net debt is taken directly from the balance sheet (short- plus long-term borrowings minus cash and short-term investments, which hold most term deposits). Fair Value = (Mid-Cycle EBITDA x Fair EV/EBITDA) - Net Debt.
Construction & materials and industrial goods & services companies with lumpy, project-based revenue and asset-backed balance sheets.
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)
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
- −0.2419th pctile
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 0.0%2nd 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 trades on UPCoM, where these tests do not apply.
EIC’s Beneish M-Score is -1.455 (Vietnam peer percentile 80th) with a year-over-year increase of +0.99, signalling that its accounting metrics have become more aggressive relative to Vietnamese peers though the absolute US cutoff (-1.78) is not directly decisive. Earnings-quality metrics are mixed: a low overall score of 33.9/100 driven by 0.0/100 cash-conversion and 0.0/100 revenue quality, while margin quality is strong at 100/100; Altman Z-Score is 36.40 (indicating a large distance from bankruptcy) and Piotroski F-Score is 4/9 (neutral).
- Beneish M-Score -1.455 (80th percentile vs Vietnamese peers; YoY change +0.99) — the score combines multiple manipulation signals and its high peer percentile and positive YoY move are indicators that accounting metrics have trended toward more aggressive settings compared with other VN companies.
- DSRI (Days’ sales receivable index) = 1.1386 — sales are being recognized faster than receivables growth would predict (or receivables growing slower than sales), a component that can signal revenue recognition timing changes.
- GMI (Gross margin index) = 1.2638 — gross margins have deteriorated year-over-year (index >1), which in Beneish’s framework raises the incentive to manage earnings.
- SGAI (Sales, general & administrative index) = 1.3694 — SGA expenses grew faster than sales, another Beneish component that can indicate pressure on reported earnings and potential management response.
- TATA (Total accruals to total assets) = 0.1446 — relatively high accruals to assets, consistent with weaker accruals quality (accruals quality 48.1/100) and with the company generating profit that is not fully cash-backed.
- Cash-conversion (3-year operating cash flow / net profit) = -0.24 (19th percentile among VN non-financials) — three-year cumulative operating cash flow is negative relative to cumulative profits, a sign profit has not been converted into cash.
- Revenue quality = 0.0/100 and Receivables quality = 34.6/100 — revenue and receivables metrics are weak in the earnings-quality decomposition, supporting the view that reported revenue/profit may be less cash-supported.
- Altman Z-Score = 36.40 — places the company well in the ‘safe’ zone on this bankruptcy-distance metric, indicating low short-term insolvency risk by that model.
- Margin quality = 100.0/100 — operating margins appear high or stable in ways that the quality model treats as strong.
- Receivables outside the trade cycle = 0.0% of total assets (2nd percentile) — there are effectively no long‑term receivables, prepayments-to-suppliers or loans-receivable reported as non-trade receivables, which reduces one common channel for off‑balance-sheet or related-party financing.
- No accumulated undistributed losses; parent profit shows 0 years of net loss up to FY2025 and owner’s equity (excluding minorities) is positive — the published statements do not show statutory accumulated-loss indicators.
Shareholding is concentrated among state-linked and sector institutions: Tổng Công ty Phát điện 1 26.1%, PPC 19.3%, Tập đoàn Công nghiệp Cao su VN 11.8%, ABB 10.3%, and Tổng Công ty Điện lực Dầu khí VN 7.7%. This large institutional/state presence suggests significant block ownership and group/sector alignment rather than dispersed retail ownership; no director-deal registrations were provided in the materials reviewed (registrations are exchange filings of intent, not executed trades).
- Compare the company’s FY2025 statement of cash flows (operating cash flows) to the consolidated income statement lines for FY2023–FY2025 to validate the reported 3-year cash-conversion ratio and identify which years drove the negative -0.24 figure.
- Inspect the notes and schedules for related-party transactions, other receivables and prepayments in FY2025 to confirm the 0.0% of total assets reported as receivables outside the trade cycle and to check for large balances disclosed elsewhere (notes to the consolidated balance sheet).
- Reconcile the components of total accruals (working capital movements, depreciation, non-cash adjustments) in the notes to the TATA = 0.1446 calculation and the accruals-quality score of 48.1/100.
- Review revenue recognition policies and segment or contract disclosures in the FY2025 notes to examine drivers of the Revenue quality = 0.0/100 and DSRI = 1.1386 (e.g., timing of contract revenue, percentage-of-completion vs. point-in-time recognition).
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 1.58
- P/S
- 59.84
- ROE
- 13.0%
- ROA
- 12.3%
- EPS
- 1.475
- BVPS
- 12.052
- Gross Margin
- 13.9%
- Net Margin
- 464.4%
- D/E
- 0.00
- Current Ratio
- 9.68
- Rev Growth
- +6.4%
- Profit Growth
- +7.1%
- EV/EBITDA
- —
- Div Yield
- —
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 36.7M
- Charter Capital
- 367B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Xây dựng và Vật liệu
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Xây dựng và Vật liệu
- Sub-industry
- Xây dựng
- Company Type
- CT