PXM
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.
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2024
PXM exhibits significant red flags indicating potential financial manipulation, as evidenced by a Beneish M-Score of -3.2987, well below the manipulation threshold of -1.78. Additionally, the earnings quality score of 2.4/100 highlights severe issues with accruals and revenue recognition, raising concerns about the reliability of reported financials.
- Beneish M-Score of -3.2987 indicates a high likelihood of earnings manipulation.
- Earnings quality score of 2.4/100 suggests extremely poor earnings quality, particularly with eq_accrual and eq_revenue both at 0.0/100.
- The SGI of 0.4717 indicates a potential decrease in sales growth, which could suggest a more conservative approach to revenue recognition.
The concentrated ownership structure, with the largest shareholder holding 48.3%, poses a risk of governance issues and potential conflicts of interest, particularly in decision-making processes.
Investors should exercise caution and conduct further due diligence before considering any investment in PXM, focusing on the company's financial disclosures 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 PXM — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate