KSQ
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 — KSQ
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2015
The Beneish M-Score of -1.8609 indicates potential earnings manipulation, as it exceeds the threshold of -1.78. However, the earnings quality score of 80.3 suggests relatively strong cash conversion and receivables management, indicating some operational strengths.
- Beneish M-Score of -1.8609 indicates potential earnings manipulation risk, exceeding the threshold of -1.78.
- SGI of 1.8913 suggests aggressive revenue growth that may not be sustainable.
- Earnings Quality Score of 80.3/100 indicates strong cash conversion (100.0/100) and receivables management (100.0/100).
- Accrual quality score of 93.1/100 suggests that the earnings reported are backed by actual cash flows.
The ownership structure is highly concentrated, with the top five shareholders holding 84.9% of the shares. This concentration increases the risk of decision-making being influenced by a few individuals, potentially leading to governance issues.
Investors should closely monitor the company's financial disclosures and operational performance to assess the sustainability of its growth. Consider a cautious approach until there is clearer evidence of consistent earnings quality and governance practices.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for KSQ — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate