ITS
Công ty Cổ phần Đầu tư, Thương mại và Dịch vụ - Vinacomin
Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 2.900
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 3.576
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.
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
- 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
Cyclical companies (chemicals, oil & gas, basic resources) have earnings that swing dramatically with commodity prices and economic cycles. Valuing them on a single year's earnings is misleading: they look cheap at peaks and expensive at troughs. This model uses 7-year median EBITDA ("mid-cycle" earnings) and a 7-year median EV/EBITDA multiple to estimate what the firm is worth at a normal point in the cycle.
Technical details
Commodity/basic-material earnings swing with global prices. Using mid-cycle EBITDA normalizes across booms and busts, preventing overpayment at cyclical peaks. EV/EBITDA is preferred over P/E because it's capital-structure-neutral and not distorted by depreciation policies.
Computes the 7-year median EBITDA and the 7-year median EV/EBITDA. With fewer than 5 years of its own EBITDA, the company's EBITDA is estimated as revenue x the sector median margin. When mid-cycle EBITDA is not positive, the value is 70% of book value per share. Fair Value = (Mid-Cycle EBITDA x Fair EV/EBITDA) - Net Debt.
Commodity producers, basic materials, chemicals, and oil & gas companies with multi-year earnings cycles.
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
- −25.272nd pctile
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 21.5%91st 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.
The company shows multiple accounting signals of weakening earnings quality: a Beneish M-Score of -1.6 (77th percentile vs Vietnamese peers) with a year-over-year rise of +0.61, an Altman Z-Score of 1.01 (in the distress zone), and an Earnings-Quality composite of 37.2/100. Key drivers include very poor cash conversion (three-year operating cash flow / net profit = -25.27, 2nd percentile) and a TATA (total accruals) of 0.1843, while receivables appear less suspicious on the Beneish components (DSRI = 0.8483) and the receivables-quality score is 100/100.
- Beneish M-Score = -1.6 (measures likelihood of earnings manipulation using eight ratios). Although the US cutoff is -1.78, this company sits at the 77th percentile among Vietnamese peers (higher = more aggressive accounting) and the M-Score rose by +0.61 year-over-year, indicating a notable upward shift in the modelled aggressive-accounting signal.
- Cash-conversion (operating cash flow / net profit, three-year) = -25.27 (measures how well reported profits convert into cash). Ranked in the 2nd percentile among Vietnamese non-financials, meaning profits have not been turning into operating cash over the period.
- TATA (total accruals) = 0.1843 (measures accrual intensity of earnings). A positive and material TATA suggests earnings include substantial accruals rather than cash-based profit recognition.
- Altman Z-Score = 1.01 (measures distance-to-distress/bankruptcy). This level places the company in the model’s distress zone, indicating financial stress per the Altman formula.
- Earnings-Quality overall = 37.2/100 with Cash conversion = 0.0/100 and Revenue quality = 0.0/100 (measures multiple aspects of earnings sustainability). Very low sub-scores for cash conversion and revenue quality raise concerns about the sustainability and cash backing of reported profits.
- Receivables outside the trade cycle = 21.5% of total assets (measures non-trade receivables such as prepayments, loans receivable and long-term receivables). At the 91st percentile among Vietnamese peers, this is a high proportion and can reflect significant related-party advances, prepayments or financial receivables that are not normal trade receivables.
- Receivables-quality score = 100.0/100 (measures the behaviour and composition of receivables). This suggests reported trade receivables exhibit characteristics consistent with good quality under the applied tests.
- DSRI = 0.8483 (days sales receivables index, one Beneish input measuring receivables relative to sales). A DSRI below 1 indicates receivables are not growing faster than sales, which reduces a common manipulation signal.
- SGAI = 0.9365 and DEPI = 0.9491 (selling/general/admin and depreciation indices in the Beneish model). Both below 1 indicate selling/administrative expense growth and depreciation patterns are not unusually high relative to sales, which can be neutral-to-positive for manipulation detection.
- Piotroski F-Score = 5/9 (measures simple fundamentals: profitability, leverage/liquidity, and operating efficiency). A middle score indicates mixed but not uniformly poor fundamental signals.
Ownership is concentrated: two private institutions hold 35.7% and 24.0%, and a large state-related industrial group (Tập đoàn Công nghiệp Than - Khoáng sản Việt Nam) holds 18.0%. No director-deal registrations were provided. The concentrated institutional and state-group ownership suggests potential for related-party transactions and group-related flows common in Vietnamese corporate groups.
- Compare FY2025 schedules for 'Receivables and other amounts due' (note or schedule) to the trade-receivables line to identify the composition of the 21.5% non-trade receivables of total assets (prepayments, loans to related parties, long-term receivables).
- Reconcile the cash-flow statement’s 'Net cash from operating activities' for FY2023–FY2025 against reported net profit in each year to substantiate the three-year cash-conversion metric of -25.27.
- Inspect the related-party transactions note and the 'Prepayments to suppliers' line for FY2025 to see whether material prepayments or intra-group balances explain high receivables-outside-the-trade-cycle.
- Check the auditor’s report and any disclosure on going-concern or post-balance-sheet events, given the Altman Z-Score of 1.01 (distress-zone) and accumulated losses tests showing no statutory accumulated loss in the published statements.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 0.28
- P/S
- 0.04
- ROE
- 1.5%
- ROA
- 0.2%
- EPS
- 161
- BVPS
- 10.836
- Gross Margin
- 3.2%
- Net Margin
- 0.2%
- D/E
- 3.50
- Current Ratio
- 0.98
- Rev Growth
- +4.8%
- Profit Growth
- +19.5%
- EV/EBITDA
- 24.73
- Div Yield
- 3.3%
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 26.5M
- Charter Capital
- 265B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Hàng & Dịch vụ Công nghiệp
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Công nghiệp nặng
- Sub-industry
- Máy công nghiệp
- Company Type
- CT