SAC
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 — SAC
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2024
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2018
The Beneish M-Score of -1.1568 indicates that SAC is not likely to be manipulating earnings, as it is above the threshold of -1.78. However, the earnings quality score of 38.4/100, particularly low cash conversion and revenue metrics, raises concerns about the sustainability of reported earnings.
- Earnings Quality Score of 38.4/100 indicates poor earnings quality, particularly with cash conversion at 0.0/100.
- High DSRI of 1.9647 suggests potential issues with inventory management, which could indicate overstatement of revenue.
- Beneish M-Score of -1.1568 is above the manipulation threshold, suggesting lower likelihood of earnings manipulation.
- Strong receivables quality score of 100.0/100 indicates effective management of accounts receivable.
The top shareholder, Công ty Cổ phần Cảng Sài Gòn, holds a significant 51.4% stake, indicating potential concentration risk and limited minority shareholder influence.
Investors should closely monitor cash flow metrics and inventory management practices, while considering a cautious approach due to the elevated risk of earnings quality issues.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for SAC — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate