GMD
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 — GMD
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
GMD exhibits a Beneish M-Score of -2.1872, indicating a low likelihood of earnings manipulation. However, the earnings quality metrics reveal significant weaknesses, particularly in revenue and margin quality, which may pose risks to future performance.
- SGI at 1.2305 indicates a high growth rate that may not be sustainable.
- EQ margin score of 24.6/100 suggests poor profitability relative to revenue.
- Beneish M-Score of -2.1872 is below the manipulation threshold, indicating lower risk of earnings manipulation.
- High receivables quality score of 100.0/100 suggests effective management of accounts receivable.
The ownership structure is relatively fragmented, with no single shareholder holding a significant majority stake, which may dilute accountability. However, institutional presence is moderate, providing some level of oversight.
Investors should closely monitor GMD's revenue growth and margin improvement strategies, while considering a cautious approach due to the earnings quality concerns. A deeper analysis into operational efficiencies may be warranted.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for GMD — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate