Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 68.300
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 79.666
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.
- Model reliability
- Low
- Model fitInput stabilityRisk checks
- High requires the model’s diagnostic criteria to be met.
- Probability of outperforming peers
- 49.7%
- 12 monthsHistorical calibration
- Chance the return beats the median return of its sector peers.
These assessments address different questions. Neither establishes that the displayed valuation is correct or guarantees a future return.
12-month sector-relative outlook
Median 12-month return difference versus Real Estate peers, for model gaps like this one.
- Not an absolute return forecast.
- Not a price target.
- A stock can underperform its sector and still rise.
- The sector’s historical range, not a prediction interval for this stock.
- Actual returns can fall outside it.
Valuation Breakdown
Developers often carry land banks at historical cost under VAS, so book value can understate asset value. This model blends two approaches: an RNAV proxy (book value with its property share marked up 1.5×) weighted 40%, and a DCF on normalized cash flows weighted 60%. Highly leveraged firms receive a +2% WACC penalty.
Technical details
RE developers carry large land inventories at historical cost; cash flows depend on project delivery timing. RNAV captures hidden land value, while DCF captures earnings power. The leverage screen guards against over-leveraged developers.
RNAV proxy: the property share of BVPS (investment property, fixed assets and inventories over total assets) × 1.5 plus the rest at book, or 1.25× all of book when that share is 10% or less or unknown, cut by up to 50% as D/E rises above 2. DCF: 5-year projection on median cash flow with CAPM-derived WACC. If D/E > 3 or interest coverage < 1.5, WACC is increased by 2%. Final value = 40% RNAV + 60% DCF.
Property developers and real estate firms with significant land banks recorded at below-market historical cost.
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)
DCF Sensitivity
Illustrative calibrated values from the standalone DCF scenarios below, anchored to the same last close. These scenarios leave out the other parts of a blended model and do not reproduce the headline value.
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
- 3.0284th pctile
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 34.4%96th 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 shows multiple accounting signals that merit scrutiny: a high Beneish M-Score of 3.0009 (98th percentile versus Vietnamese peers; year-over-year change +4.07) driven by very large SGI (8.1792) and LVGI (1.3104), and a very low Revenue-quality subscore (3.8/100). Offsetting signals include strong accruals, cash-conversion and receivables metrics (Accruals quality 100/100; Cash conversion 100/100; Receivables quality 100/100) and a Piotroski F-Score of 6/9. The Altman Z-Score is 1.30 (in the distress zone).
- Beneish M-Score = 3.0009 (measures likelihood of earnings manipulation using an eight-variable model); this is in the 98th Vietnam-peer percentile (higher = more aggressive accounting among VN peers) and increased by +4.07 year-over-year (the trajectory moved markedly). Note: the -1.78 US cutoff is not Vietnamese-calibrated, so weight peer percentile and YoY change.
- SGI (Sales Growth Index) = 8.1792 (measures sales growth; values >>1 indicate rapid revenue growth relative to the prior year) — unusually large and a primary driver of the M-Score increase.
- Revenue quality = 3.8/100 (an earnings-quality subscore; this is very low and indicates reported revenue is the weakest component of the company’s earnings quality profile).
- Receivables outside the trade cycle = 34.4% of total assets (96th VN percentile; this line includes prepayments to suppliers, loans receivable and other long-term receivables — a high share of non-trade receivables relative to assets).
- Cash conversion (operating cash flow / net profit, 3-year) = 3.02 (84th VN percentile; low value means profits are not translating into operating cash flow over three years).
- Altman Z-Score = 1.30 (measures distance to bankruptcy; value in the ‘distress’ zone under the Z-Score model).
- Accruals quality = 100.0/100 (measures how much of earnings are accrual-based; a high score indicates low abnormal accruals and cleaner earnings from the accruals perspective).
- Cash conversion score = 100.0/100 (from the earnings-quality breakdown; indicates good short-term cash/earnings alignment on that scoring metric despite the three-year cash-conversion ratio being low in the VN peer rank—interpretation depends on the scoring method used).
- Receivables quality = 100.0/100 (in the earnings-quality components; suggests the aging/recognition approach to trade receivables scored well even though there is a large stock of receivables outside the trade cycle).
- TATA (Total Accruals to Total Assets) = -0.1199 (this Beneish component measures accruals: negative indicates net cash-based earnings movement rather than large positive accrual buildups).
- Piotroski F-Score = 6/9 (a neutral-to-favorable score on fundamental operational and profitability signals).
- No accumulated losses; owner’s equity (parent, excluding minorities) positive; 0 consecutive years of parent net loss up to FY2025 — statutory loss tests under Decree 155/2020 (as amended) are not met (a factual statement about the published statements).
Ownership is highly concentrated: Đỗ Anh Tuấn holds 61.4% (individual); related individuals (Đỗ Thị Định 4.2%, Đỗ Văn Trường 4.0%, Đỗ Thị Hồng Nhung 0.7%) bring the named-family block to roughly 70.3% of shares among the top four family members. Such concentration and apparent family control increase the potential for related-party transactions and group-structure effects in the accounts (a descriptive fact, not a recommendation).
- Compare the FY2025 line(s) for ‘Prepayments to suppliers’, ‘Loans receivable’ and ‘Other long-term receivables’ in the statement of financial position to the related-party disclosures and the notes that explain composition and counterparties (to understand the 34.4% of assets classified as receivables outside the trade cycle).
- Reconcile consolidated operating cash flow and parent profit in the cash-flow statement and the notes for FY2023–FY2025 to substantiate the 3-year cash-conversion ratio of 3.02 (verify which items — e.g., changes in working capital, one-offs, non-cash items — drive the gap between profit and cash flows).
- Examine the revenue recognition note(s) and schedules (including segment and contract disclosures, if any) for FY2025 to assess drivers of the very low Revenue-quality score (3.8/100) and the components of SGI = 8.1792 (which indicates very high reported sales growth).
- Review related-party transactions, intercompany balances and guarantees in the notes and the ‘transactions with related parties’ schedule for FY2025 to check for large flows that could explain elevated receivables outside the trade cycle and leverage-growth signals (LVGI = 1.3104).
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 3.71
- P/S
- 3.15
- ROE
- 76.7%
- ROA
- 12.1%
- EPS
- 9.449
- BVPS
- 19.061
- Gross Margin
- 65.0%
- Net Margin
- 44.1%
- D/E
- 1.19
- Current Ratio
- 1.54
- Rev Growth
- +720.3%
- Profit Growth
- +1120.3%
- EV/EBITDA
- 7.02
- Div Yield
- —
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 900M
- Charter Capital
- 8,998B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Bất động sản
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Bất động sản
- Sub-industry
- Bất động sản
- Company Type
- CT