StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
148A.T$1728.00+0.41%
Fair $1728.00+0.0%

148A.T

148A.T

Industrials / Specialty Business ServicesTokyo

$1728.00

+7.00 (+0.41%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $1728.00Fund rank 28/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 51/C
F-Score: 6/9

FCF base 3Y

n/d

n/d CAGR · yield n/d

FCF base 5Y

n/d

n/d base · n/d expected

Precio de entrada

n/d

MOS 33% · confianza 20%

FCF escenarios

weak_data · normalized FCF $60.1M · quality 46.7/100

Data gap 28/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 24/100Data QA 20/100

Ranking barato/determinista: CAGR esperado 5Y + downside bear + calidad del modelo + balance + capital allocation + data gate. No entra en buy-candidate si la data es débil o el CAGR 5Y no compensa.

Quality + valuation scorecard

SA Score

51/100

C

Piotroski

6/9

balance/quality

Valuation

50/100

+0.0% upside

5Y CAGR

+0.0%

50/100

Data QA

16/100

SEC 0%

Latest source: unknownPeriods: 4Warnings: 0unknown: 4
No SEC-backed annual rows; valuation uses fallback financial data. Insufficient audited annual history (<3 SEC-backed years); composite fair value and forward targets are disabled until manually verified.
Thesis & Journal · 148A.TLocal privado en este navegador · 148A.T
Plantilla tipo buy-side: tesis, bull/base/bear, catalizadores, riesgos, kill criteria y fecha de revisión. Esto no gasta GPT-5.5; luego lo usamos como contexto del memo.

Sin guardar todavía.

Market Cap

$3.3B

P/E

14.0x

↓

EV/EBITDA

7.6x

↓

ROE

24.0%

↑

Gross Margin

59.1%

↑

Debt/Equity

0.43

↑
52-Week Range$1728
$1647$3155

TradingView lightweight chart

148A.T price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $1,728Periodo -47.9%
Fair value: $1,728

Price & Ratios

Absolute Values (Left Axis)

Ratios / Percentages (Right Axis)

Financial statement dashboard

Crecimiento, márgenes y provenance

2022–2025 · 3 años de histórico normalizado

Revenue CAGR

+18.7%

FCF CAGR

—

FCF margin

9.7%

FCF / Net income

1.08x

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $2.76B · net income $246.9M · FCF $266.3M

2022-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

59.1%+16.9% pts

Operating margin

9.5%+32.8% pts

Net margin

8.9%+31.5% pts

FCF margin

9.7%+21.7% pts
MetricTTM
2025
2024
2023
2022
Income Statement
Revenue$2.76B$2.76B$2.37B$2.06B$1.65B
Net Income$246.9M$246.9M$131.0M$77.9M$-371.9M
EBITDA$294.2M$294.2M$161.2M$55.8M$-366.9M
EPS——69.3047.02-225.78
Gross Margin59.1%59.1%58.2%53.1%42.2%
Operating Margin9.5%9.5%7.7%1.0%-23.3%
Net Margin8.9%8.9%5.5%3.8%-22.6%
Balance Sheet
Debt/Equity0.430.430.682.154.18
Current Ratio1.421.42———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow$266.3M$266.3M$11.3M$60.1M$-198.6M
Returns
ROE24.0%24.0%16.9%31.0%-214.2%
Valuation
P/E13.9713.9729.15——
EV/EBITDA7.617.6117.81——
P/B3.233.234.91——
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth16.5%16.5%15.1%24.8%—
EPS Growth——47.4%120.8%—

Revenue, Net Income & Free Cash Flow ($B)

Margins (%)

Returns (%)

Leverage & Liquidity

Reverse DCF · market-implied EPS growthterminal P/E 15.0x · COE 10.0%
Reverse DCF requires positive EPS; loss-making or zero-EPS companies cannot produce a clean EPS hurdle.

Qué te dice: cuánto EPS CAGR está descontando el precio si sales al múltiplo terminal indicado. Si el growth observado queda por debajo, el mercado está pidiendo una ejecución muy fina.

Return attribution · 1Y approxreconcilia total -16.5%

Total return

-16.5%

Start / end P/E

n/dx → n/dx

EPS bridge

69.30 → n/d

Residual

-16.5%

EPS growthn/d
Multiple reratingn/d
Dividend+0.0%
Residual / FX / buybacks / cross-term-16.5%

EPS/multiple decomposition requires positive EPS at both endpoints; residual absorbs price move not explained by dividends.

Simple additive decomposition: total return = EPS growth contribution + P/E multiple contribution + dividend contribution + explicit residual. The residual captures cross-terms, buybacks/share-count effects, FX, special dividends, data noise and methodology mismatch so the bridge always reconciles.