Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 2.600
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 2.916
Last close × (1 + calibrated gap / 100)
Earnings-capitalised value
Not available: the company reported a loss last year or its shares have too short a price history.
How it is calculated
- 1Measure the gap
Between the model and the last close.
- 2Check the record2015–2024
What gaps of that size went on to earn over the following year.
- 3Apply to the close
That return is applied to the last close.
Keep in mind
- For illustration only: not a validated forecast.
- No uncertainty range: the estimate is a single figure.
- Older record: it has not been re-measured on the current data.
Why it needs review
- Trading liquidity is below the comparison threshold.
- Under financial distress the model falls back to book value.
This estimate remains visible for checking its calculation. Its inputs require review before using it in a stock comparison. The model comparison behind this value needs review. The estimate does not remove the data limitations listed above.
Comparison assessed 3 Nov 2026Valid through 28 Nov 2026
- Model reliability
- Very Low
- Model fitInput stabilityRisk checks
- High requires the model’s diagnostic criteria to be met.
- Probability of outperforming peers
- Not assessed
- A separate peer-outperformance probability is unavailable for this valuation.
These assessments address different questions. Neither establishes that the displayed valuation is correct or guarantees a future return.
Valuation Breakdown
Construction and industrial firms have lumpy, project-based earnings that swing with the building cycle. Order books fill and empty, so a single year's profit is a poor guide to normal earning power. This model values them on through-cycle EBITDA: a 7-year median EBITDA ("mid-cycle" earnings) times a fair EV/EBITDA multiple, less net debt. It mirrors the cyclical model.
Technical details
Project-based revenue is lumpy and asset-backed. EV/EBITDA is capital-structure-neutral and undistorted by depreciation policy, and mid-cycle EBITDA normalizes across the building cycle so a firm isn't overvalued at a peak or undervalued at a trough.
Computes 7-year median EBITDA and a fair EV/EBITDA from the firm's own history blended toward the construction-sector median. Net debt is taken directly from the balance sheet (short- plus long-term borrowings minus cash and short-term investments, which hold most term deposits). Fair Value = (Mid-Cycle EBITDA x Fair EV/EBITDA) - Net Debt.
Construction & materials and industrial goods & services companies with lumpy, project-based revenue and asset-backed balance sheets.
We take the model’s gap to the last close, read what gaps of that size went on to earn over the following year in our 2015 to 2024 record, and apply that to the last close.
Last close × (1 + calibrated gap / 100)
Earnings Quality
Financial Forensics
Ranked vs Vietnamese peers. The −1.78 Beneish cutoff is US-calibrated; ~28% of VN stocks exceed it.
Checks measured on Vietnamese companies · FY2025
- Cash conversion, 3 yearsOperating cash flow / net profit
- 11.8197th pctile
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 0.5%24th pctile
- Accumulated losses / paid-in capitalUndistributed earnings below zero
- 0.48×
- Consecutive years of net lossProfit after tax of the parent
- 0
- Owner's equityWithout the non-controlling interest
- Positive
Percentiles rank each fiscal year against Vietnamese non-financial companies (0 lowest, 100 highest). Over FY2015-2024, low cash conversion and a large share of receivables outside the trade cycle came before more listing trouble and more net losses the next year.
Statutory loss tests (Decree 155/2020/NĐ-CP, Art. 120(1)(e), amended by Decree 245/2025/NĐ-CP): a HOSE or HNX listing is cancelled when the audited annual statements show net losses in each of the latest 3 years, accumulated losses above the paid-in charter capital, or negative owner's equity. Read here from the annual statements as the data vendor publishes them.
The company shows several warning signs on accounting aggressiveness: a Beneish M-Score of 3.5993 (99th percentile among Vietnamese peers) with a year-over-year rise of +4.73, driven by high SGI (10.0000) and LVGI (2.9835). At the same time, underlying accounting and operating signals are mixed: very high scores for accruals, cash-conversion and receivables quality (each 100/100) and a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9, but extremely weak margin and revenue quality (0/100 each) and an Altman Z-Score of 1.31 (in the distress zone).
- Beneish M-Score = 3.5993 (measures likelihood of earnings manipulation based on eight financial ratios); company is at the 99th percentile versus Vietnamese peers, and the M-Score increased by +4.73 year-on-year (the change is a secondary cue given low serial correlation). Note: the -1.78 cutoff is US-calibrated and about 28% of Vietnamese stocks exceed it, so peer percentile and trajectory matter here.
- SGI (Sales Growth Index) = 10.0000 (measures growth in sales; an unusually high value can indicate aggressive revenue recognition or one-off spikes).
- LVGI (Leverage Index) = 2.9835 (measures change in leverage; a large increase suggests rising debt relative to assets/equity).
- AQI (Asset Quality Index) = 1.3718 (measures shifts toward less tangible/short-term assets; >1 can indicate capitalizing or reclassifying expenses to assets).
- Margin quality = 0.0/100 and Revenue quality = 0.0/100 (these earnings-quality components measure stability and sustainability of margins and revenue; both at the bottom of the scale are concerning for reported profitability).
- Altman Z-Score = 1.31 (measures distance to bankruptcy; 1.31 places the company in the distress zone for default risk).
- Three-year cash conversion (operating cash flow / net profit) = 11.81, at the 97th percentile among Vietnamese non-financials (this measures how much reported profit converts into operating cash; a very low ratio here indicates profit is not converting into cash).
- Accruals quality = 100.0/100 (measures the quality of accrual accounting; a perfect score suggests reported earnings are not driven by abnormal accruals).
- Cash conversion quality = 100.0/100 (measures short-term cash-generating ability relative to profit in detailed scoring; a high score here is supportive of cash-related disclosures despite the three-year aggregate cash-conversion ratio being weak).
- Receivables quality = 100.0/100 and Receivables outside the trade cycle = 0.5% of total assets (24th percentile) (these measure whether receivables are unusual or dominated by loans/prepayments; both indicate receivables are not a major off-cycle concern).
- Piotroski F-Score = 7/9 (measures nine fundamental signals of financial strength; a 7 suggests generally solid fundamentals).
- No statutory loss tests met under Decree 155/2020 Art. 120(1)(e) as amended (these are the published-statement facts that would trigger exchange cancellation tests; none were met for FY2025).
- Owner's equity (excluding minority interest) is positive and net parent profit has not been a loss in any of the last 0 consecutive years up to FY2025 (indicates equity is intact and parent did not report a statutory loss).
Top ownership is relatively concentrated: Công ty TNHH Đỗ Huấn (institution) holds 21.6%, and four named individuals together hold 39.7% (Hao Dan 14.8%, Lê Đình Chiến 13.2%, Nguyễn Thị Miền 6.2%, Xu Xiu Li 5.5%). No director-deal registrations were provided in the dataset (director-deal registrations, when present, are exchange-registered intentions rather than executed trades).
- Compare the FY2025 and FY2024 schedules for prepayments, long-term receivables and loans receivable in the notes (verify the line items that feed the 'receivables outside the trade cycle' 0.5% of assets).
- Reconcile the consolidated cash-flow statement (operating cash flow) with consolidated net profit and the detailed reconciliation of profit-to-cash (explain the three-year cash-conversion ratio of 11.81 and the components of operating cash flows).
- Inspect the revenue breakdown and the notes on significant contracts, related-party sales and revenue recognition policies (given SGI = 10.0000 and revenue-quality = 0/100).
- Review the debt and lease note and the movement in liabilities that produce LVGI = 2.9835 and Altman components (confirm sources of rising leverage and whether any off-balance financing is disclosed).
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 0.50
- P/S
- 1.23
- ROE
- 13.1%
- ROA
- 10.9%
- EPS
- 638
- BVPS
- 5.181
- Gross Margin
- 6.6%
- Net Margin
- 30.2%
- D/E
- 0.00
- Current Ratio
- 4.18
- Rev Growth
- +1465.7%
- Profit Growth
- +642.4%
- EV/EBITDA
- —
- Div Yield
- —
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 5.9M
- Charter Capital
- 59.3B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Xây dựng và Vật liệu
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Xây dựng và Vật liệu
- Sub-industry
- Xây dựng
- Company Type
- CT