SVN
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 — SVN
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
The forensic assessment of SVN indicates significant red flags, particularly a Beneish M-Score of 4.4696, which suggests a high likelihood of earnings manipulation. Coupled with a poor earnings quality score of 10.1/100, the financial integrity of the company is under serious scrutiny.
- Beneish M-Score of 4.4696 exceeds the manipulation threshold of -1.78, indicating potential earnings manipulation.
- Earnings Quality Score of 10.1/100 highlights severe issues with accruals and cash conversion, suggesting unreliable financial reporting.
- DSRI of 8.2462 indicates a significant increase in receivables relative to sales, which can signal aggressive revenue recognition practices.
The ownership structure is concentrated, with the top shareholder holding 28% of the shares, which may lead to governance issues and a lack of accountability in decision-making.
Investors should exercise caution and consider avoiding SVN until further transparency in financial reporting is established. A thorough review of the company's financial statements and governance practices is recommended.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for SVN — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate