Calibrated intrinsic value vs last close
Illustrative estimate- Last close (VND)
- 9.000
- Calibrated intrinsic value (VND)
- 9.544
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.
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 3 Dec 2026
- Model reliability
- 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
Technology companies combine high growth potential with the risk of overvaluation. This model blends DCF (60% weight, capturing long-duration growth) with a P/E sanity check (40% weight, capping speculative excess). The DCF lets growth fade more slowly than in any other sector, recognizing that tech companies can sustain competitive advantages longer. The P/E component applies a dynamic ceiling: max P/E = min(growth% x 1.5, 30), preventing runaway valuations.
Technical details
Tech firms combine high growth potential with current profitability that peers can benchmark. Pure DCF could overvalue if growth assumptions are too aggressive. The P/E blend acts as a market-calibrated anchor, while the PEG-based cap prevents paying excessive multiples.
DCF: 10-year FCF projection with growth capped at 20%, fading more slowly than in any other sector toward the sector's long-run growth rate. P/E: 5-year median P/E capped at dynamic ceiling (growth x 1.5, max 30). Blend: 60% DCF + 40% P/E.
Technology and IT companies where high growth potential must be balanced against the risk of speculative overvaluation.
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)
DCF Sensitivity
Illustrative calibrated values from the standalone DCF scenarios below, anchored to the same last close. These scenarios leave out the other parts of a blended model and do not reproduce the headline value.
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
- −15.022nd pctile
- Receivables outside the trade cyclePrepayments to suppliers, loans and other long-term receivables / total assets
- 5.3%69th pctile
- Accumulated losses / paid-in capitalUndistributed earnings below zero
- None
- 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 accounting signals show multiple concerns about earnings quality and financial distress: a Beneish M‑Score of 0.408 (95th percentile vs Vietnamese peers; year‑over‑year change +3.63) indicates materially more aggressive accounting than most local peers, while the Earnings‑Quality composite is very low at 6.1/100 and the Altman Z‑Score is 1.17 (distress zone). At the same time, there are no accumulated losses and the statutory loss tests in the audited statements are not met.
- Beneish M‑Score = 0.408 (measures probability of earnings manipulation traits); this is at the 95th percentile against Vietnamese peers, meaning VTC scores more aggressively on the model than ~95% of non‑financial Vietnamese listed companies.
- M‑Score year‑over‑year change = +3.63 (measures the trajectory of the M‑Score); a large positive change indicates accounting signals have moved materially toward more aggressive readings in the last year.
- DSRI = 1.3529 (Days Sales in Receivables Index; higher values can indicate revenue being recorded earlier or receivables growth outpacing sales).
- GMI = 2.0362 (Gross Margin Index; >1 can indicate deteriorating gross margins which management might try to mask).
- DEPI = 1.3785 (Depreciation Index; >1 can indicate slower depreciation vs prior year, which inflates profits).
- TATA = 0.2340 (Total Accruals to Total Assets; relatively elevated accruals, contributing to low accruals quality score of 24.3/100).
- Earnings‑Quality Score = 6.1/100 (an aggregate measure of how much reported earnings reflect underlying cash and sustainable margins).
- Cash conversion (3‑year OCF / net profit) = -15.02 (2nd percentile among Vietnamese peers; indicates profits are not converting into cash flows).
- Altman Z‑Score = 1.17 (measures bankruptcy distance; this sits in the distress zone).
- Piotroski F‑Score = 2/9 (measures nine fundamentals of profitability, leverage/liquidity and operating efficiency; a low score indicates weak fundamentals).
- Revenue quality, margin quality, receivables quality, and cash conversion all scored 0.0/100 in the earnings‑quality components (each measures different facets of revenue persistence, margin sustainability, collectibility of receivables, and cash realisation).
- No accumulated losses: undistributed earnings are positive (the balance sheet shows retained earnings not negative).
- Statutory loss tests under Decree 155/2020 Art.120(1)(e) (as amended) are not met in the audited annual statements (the factual tests that would trigger listing cancellation have not occurred).
- Receivables outside the trade cycle = 5.3% of total assets (measures prepayments, loans receivable and other long‑term receivables); this sits at the 69th percentile among Vietnamese peers, so the level is not unusually high by local standards.
Ownership is highly concentrated: Tập Đoàn Bưu Chính Viễn Thông Việt Nam holds 46.7% and an individual, Lê Xuân Tiến, holds 20.4%, together giving large controlling stakes. Director‑deal disclosures show 2 sale registrations totalling 3,044,178 shares (net registered volume = -57.14% of shares outstanding) between 2025‑10‑30 and 2026‑10‑30; these are exchange trade registrations (intentions), not executed trades.
- Compare the recorded components of DSRI (trade receivables vs revenue) in the notes to trade receivables and the revenue recognition policy to see what is driving DSRI = 1.3529.
- Reconcile cash flow from operating activities to reported net profit in the statement of cash flows and the notes to verify the 3‑year cash conversion ratio of -15.02 and identify unusual non‑cash accruals (supporting the TATA = 0.2340 and accruals quality = 24.3/100).
- Inspect the notes labelled 'Related party transactions' and schedules of prepayments/loans to third parties to confirm the composition of the 5.3% of total assets classified as receivables outside the trade cycle.
- Review the auditor's report and the statutory statements to confirm that none of the Decree 155/2020 Art.120(1)(e) loss conditions are met and to read any emphasis of matter or going concern paragraphs that may relate to the Altman Z‑Score = 1.17.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
- P/B
- 0.71
- P/S
- 0.09
- ROE
- 5.7%
- ROA
- 0.9%
- EPS
- 867
- BVPS
- 15.154
- Gross Margin
- 10.1%
- Net Margin
- 0.8%
- D/E
- 2.95
- Current Ratio
- 1.12
- Rev Growth
- +121.0%
- Profit Growth
- +11.0%
- EV/EBITDA
- 14.40
- Div Yield
- 6.5%
Company Overview
- Shares outstanding
- 5.3M
- Charter Capital
- 53.3B VND
- Sector (ICB L2)
- Công nghệ Thông tin
- Industry (ICB L3)
- Thiết bị và Phần cứng
- Sub-industry
- Thiết bị viễn thông
- Company Type
- CT