StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
7315.KL$0.03+0.00%
Fair $0.03+0.0%

7315.KL

AHB Holdings Berhad

Industrials / ConglomeratesKuala Lumpur

$0.03

+0.00 (+0.00%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $0.03Fund rank 26/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 13/F
F-Score: 4/9
Low Profitability

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 34% · confianza 19%

FCF escenarios

weak_data · normalized FCF $-10.7M · quality 51.0/100

Data gap 26/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 31/100Data 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

13/100

F

Piotroski

4/9

balance/quality

Valuation

50/100

+0.0% upside

5Y CAGR

+0.0%

50/100

Data QA

16/100

SEC 0%

Latest source: unknownPeriods: 4Warnings: 1unknown: 4
No SEC-backed annual rows; valuation uses fallback financial data. Sector-specific holding-company NAV/SOTP model required: targets are disabled until look-through holdings, debt and discount data exists. ROE is -15.5%, below the 5% threshold
Thesis & Journal · 7315.KLLocal privado en este navegador · AHB Holdings Berhad
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

$26M

P/E

N/A

•

EV/EBITDA

N/A

•

ROE

-15.5%

↓

Gross Margin

N/A

•

Debt/Equity

N/A

•
52-Week Range$0
$0$0

TradingView lightweight chart

7315.KL price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $0.030Periodo -99.0%
Fair value: $0.030

Price & Ratios

Absolute Values (Left Axis)

Ratios / Percentages (Right Axis)

Financial statement dashboard

Crecimiento, márgenes y provenance

2021–2025 · 4 años de histórico normalizado

Revenue CAGR

+31.8%

FCF CAGR

—

FCF margin

-22.4%

FCF / Net income

0.90x

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $24.0M · net income $-6.0M · FCF $-5.4M

2021-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

—— pts

Operating margin

—— pts

Net margin

-24.8%+44.7% pts

FCF margin

-22.4%+20.3% pts
MetricTTM
2025
2023
2022
2021
Income Statement
Revenue$24.0M$24.0M$14.8M$10.2M$8.0M
Net Income$-6.0M$-6.0M$-17.2M$-9.1M$-5.5M
EBITDA$-4.7M$-4.7M$-14.9M$-6.3M$-3.0M
EPS-0.01-0.01-0.04-0.03-0.02
Gross Margin———18.1%18.6%
Operating Margin———-25.1%-65.0%
Net Margin-24.8%-24.8%-116.8%-89.1%-69.5%
Balance Sheet
Debt/Equity——0.100.170.22
Current Ratio15.3815.38———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow$-5.4M$-5.4M$-10.7M$-12.9M$-3.4M
Returns
ROE-15.5%-15.5%-46.9%-32.4%-21.6%
Valuation
P/B0.580.581.771.471.21
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth62.5%62.5%44.7%28.2%—
EPS Growth78.4%78.4%-38.6%-23.6%—

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 +0.0%

Total return

+0.0%

Start / end P/E

n/dx → n/dx

EPS bridge

-0.04 → -0.01

Residual

+0.0%

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

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.