StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
5027.T$507.00+1.81%
Fair $507.00+0.0%

5027.T

AnyMind Group Inc.

Technology / Software - ApplicationTokyo

$507.00

+9.00 (+1.81%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $507.00Fund rank 27/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 41/C
F-Score: 2/9

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 21%

FCF escenarios

weak_data · normalized FCF $1.3B · quality 42.0/100

Data gap 27/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 30/100Data 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

41/100

C

Piotroski

2/9

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 · 5027.TLocal privado en este navegador · AnyMind Group Inc.
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

$30.5B

P/E

34.2x

↑

EV/EBITDA

19.3x

↑

ROE

5.5%

↑

Gross Margin

38.3%

↑

Debt/Equity

0.85

↑
52-Week Range$507
$375$829

TradingView lightweight chart

5027.T price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $507.00Periodo -49.8%
Fair value: $507.00

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

+32.2%

FCF CAGR

—

FCF margin

—

FCF / Net income

—

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $57.30B · net income $927.0M · FCF —

2022-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

38.3%+0.8% pts

Operating margin

3.3%+3.1% pts

Net margin

1.6%+0.7% pts

FCF margin

—— pts
MetricTTM
2025
2024
2023
2022
Income Statement
Revenue$57.30B$57.30B$50.71B$33.46B$24.79B
Net Income$927.0M$927.0M$2.33B$559.0M$239.0M
EBITDA$1.86B$1.86B$4.03B$1.82B$1.26B
EPS——37.378.964.03
Gross Margin38.3%38.3%37.0%38.0%37.5%
Operating Margin3.3%3.3%5.1%2.6%0.2%
Net Margin1.6%1.6%4.6%1.7%1.0%
Balance Sheet
Debt/Equity0.850.850.340.070.11
Current Ratio1.551.55———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow——$1.94B$606.0M$-858.0M
Returns
ROE5.5%5.5%14.1%4.1%2.1%
Valuation
P/E34.1634.1627.0399.78—
EV/EBITDA19.3319.3314.6627.71—
P/B1.791.793.804.13—
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth13.0%13.0%51.6%35.0%—
EPS Growth——317.1%122.3%—
Dividend Yield0.4%0.4%———

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 -2.5%

Total return

-2.5%

Start / end P/E

n/dx → n/dx

EPS bridge

37.37 → n/d

Residual

-2.9%

EPS growthn/d
Multiple reratingn/d
Dividend+0.4%
Residual / FX / buybacks / cross-term-2.9%

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.