RYG
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 — RYG
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
The Beneish M-Score of -1.9958 indicates a potential risk of earnings manipulation, as it exceeds the threshold of -1.78. Additionally, the earnings quality score of 41.9/100, particularly low cash conversion and revenue metrics, raises concerns about the sustainability of reported earnings.
- Beneish M-Score of -1.9958 indicates potential earnings manipulation, exceeding the threshold of -1.78.
- Earnings Quality Score of 41.9/100, with cash conversion at 0.0/100, suggests significant issues in converting earnings to cash.
- Receivables score of 100.0/100 indicates strong management of accounts receivable, suggesting effective collection practices.
The top shareholders are primarily individuals, with the largest holding at 20.8%, which may lead to governance concerns and potential influence on decision-making that does not align with minority shareholders' interests.
Investors should closely monitor RYG's financial disclosures and consider a cautious approach, given the elevated risk of earnings manipulation and low earnings quality. It may be prudent to wait for improved financial transparency and performance metrics before making significant investments.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for RYG — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate