
TUG
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 — TUG
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
TUG exhibits a moderate risk profile with a Beneish M-Score of -1.1395, indicating a low likelihood of earnings manipulation. However, the earnings quality score of 64.6 suggests some concerns, particularly in revenue recognition, which could impact future performance.
- Earnings Quality Score of 64.6 indicates potential issues with revenue recognition, particularly with an eq_revenue score of 3.8/100.
- High DEPI of 4.9420 suggests aggressive depreciation policies that may inflate earnings.
- Beneish M-Score of -1.1395 is well above the manipulation threshold of -1.78, indicating a lower risk of earnings manipulation.
- Strong cash conversion metrics with an eq_cash_conv score of 100.0/100, suggesting effective cash flow management.
The high concentration of ownership, with 60.3% held by Công ty Cổ phần Cảng Hải Phòng, may lead to governance risks and potential conflicts of interest, impacting minority shareholders.
Investors should closely monitor revenue recognition practices and consider the implications of concentrated ownership. A deeper analysis of cash flow sustainability is recommended before making investment decisions.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for TUG — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate