VSG
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.
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2024
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2024
VSG exhibits significant red flags indicating potential financial manipulation, as evidenced by a Beneish M-Score of -6.6848, well below the threshold of -1.78. The company's low earnings quality score of 20.7/100, particularly concerning accruals and receivables, further underscores the risk of inflated financial reporting.
- Beneish M-Score of -6.6848 indicates strong likelihood of earnings manipulation.
- Earnings Quality Score of 20.7/100, with eq_accrual and eq_receivables both at 0.0/100, suggests poor earnings quality.
- SGAI of 3.1114 indicates excessive selling, which may reflect underlying issues in revenue sustainability.
- Revenue quality score of 100.0/100 indicates strong revenue generation capabilities.
- Low SGI of 0.3500 suggests that sales growth is not overly aggressive compared to prior periods.
The ownership structure is concentrated, with the top two institutional shareholders holding a combined 54.9%, which may lead to governance risks and potential conflicts of interest.
Investors should exercise caution and conduct further due diligence before considering VSG, particularly focusing on cash flow and operational performance metrics to validate financial health.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for VSG — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate