PJT
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 — PJT
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
PJT displays a concerning risk profile with a Beneish M-Score of -2.5129, indicating potential earnings manipulation. However, its earnings quality score of 68.9 suggests reasonable performance in cash conversion and receivables management, which mitigates some risk.
- Beneish M-Score of -2.5129, significantly below the manipulation threshold of -1.78.
- Earnings quality revenue score of 0.0/100, indicating potential issues with revenue recognition.
- Earnings quality cash conversion score of 100.0/100, indicating strong cash generation capabilities.
- Strong institutional ownership at 51.2% by Tổng Công ty Vận Tải Thủy Petrolimex, suggesting stability and confidence from a major stakeholder.
The high institutional ownership (51.2%) provides a level of stability, but the concentration of ownership raises potential governance risks, particularly if decisions favor the interests of the major shareholder.
Investors should closely monitor PJT's revenue recognition practices and consider a cautious approach, given the elevated risk of earnings manipulation, while leveraging its strong cash conversion metrics.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for PJT — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate