PDB
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 — PDB
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
PDB exhibits several concerning indicators of potential earnings manipulation, as evidenced by a Beneish M-Score of -2.9576, which is significantly below the manipulation threshold of -1.78. However, the company demonstrates strong earnings quality metrics, particularly in cash conversion and receivables, suggesting some operational strengths.
- Beneish M-Score of -2.9576 indicates a high likelihood of earnings manipulation.
- SGI of 1.3825 suggests aggressive revenue growth that may not be supported by underlying cash flows.
- Earnings Quality Score of 63.5/100 indicates reasonable overall earnings quality.
- Cash conversion and receivables metrics are perfect at 100.0/100, indicating strong operational efficiency.
The ownership structure is relatively fragmented, with the largest shareholder holding only 21.7%, which may lead to governance challenges and potential conflicts of interest among shareholders.
Investors should closely monitor PDB's financial disclosures for signs of earnings manipulation and consider a cautious approach given the elevated risk level, while also recognizing the company's strong cash conversion capabilities.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for PDB — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate