HC1
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 — HC1
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2024
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2024
HC1 exhibits several concerning indicators of potential financial manipulation, particularly with a Beneish M-Score of -2.2085, which is significantly below the manipulation threshold of -1.78. While the earnings quality score of 52.9 suggests some level of reliability, the low scores in revenue and margin quality raise significant concerns.
- Beneish M-Score of -2.2085 indicates potential earnings manipulation, significantly below the threshold of -1.78.
- Earnings Quality Score of 52.9, with particularly low metrics in eq_receivables (0.0/100) and eq_margin (15.3/100), suggests poor revenue recognition practices.
- High eq_accrual score of 87.6/100 and eq_cash_conv score of 100.0/100 indicate strong cash conversion and accrual quality.
The ownership structure is heavily concentrated, with Tổng Công ty Xây dựng Hà Nội holding 50.4%, which may lead to governance issues and reduced accountability for minority shareholders.
Investors should exercise caution and conduct further due diligence, particularly focusing on revenue recognition practices and the implications of concentrated ownership 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 HC1 — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate