
XMC
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 — XMC
Earnings Quality
Fiscal year 2025
Financial Forensics
Beneish M-Score · 2025
XMC exhibits a Beneish M-Score of -2.8125, indicating a lower likelihood of earnings manipulation, as it is below the threshold of -1.78. However, the high SGAI of 2.5726 and low earnings quality metrics raise concerns about operational efficiency and revenue recognition practices.
- SGAI of 2.5726 suggests excessive selling, which may indicate aggressive revenue recognition practices.
- Earnings Quality Score of 62.8/100, particularly low scores in eq_margin (0.0/100) and eq_revenue (0.0/100), signal potential issues with revenue sustainability.
- Beneish M-Score of -2.8125 indicates a lower likelihood of earnings manipulation.
- High cash conversion (100.0/100) and receivables quality (100.0/100) suggest strong cash flow management.
The ownership structure is heavily concentrated, with Công ty TNHH Kiên Hùng holding 51% of shares, which may lead to governance risks and potential conflicts of interest among major shareholders.
Investors should closely monitor operational metrics and revenue recognition practices, given the elevated SGAI and low earnings quality scores. Consider a cautious approach to investment until further transparency in financial reporting is established.
Generated by AI based on quantitative data. Not financial advice.
Quantitative Scores
Key Ratios
Company Overview
// OWNERSHIP_NETWORK
> mapping common ownership for XMC — hover nodes for intel, click to navigate