StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
LIDFA.IS$2.99+0.67%
Fair $2.99+0.0%

LIDFA.IS

Lider Faktoring A.S.

Financial Services / Credit ServicesIstanbul

$2.99

+0.02 (+0.67%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $2.99Fund rank 19/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 43/C
F-Score: 2/9
High Debt

Book/ROE base 3Y

n/d

n/d CAGR · P/B n/d

Book/ROE base 5Y

n/d

n/d base · n/d expected

Precio de entrada

n/d

MOS 100% · confianza 20%

Book/ROE escenarios

weak_data · book/share n/d · quality 100.0/100

Data gap 19/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 28/100Data 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

43/100

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: 1unknown: 4
No SEC-backed annual rows; valuation uses fallback financial data. Insufficient audited annual history (<3 SEC-backed years); financial Book/ROE targets are disabled until manually verified. Debt-to-Equity ratio is 3.46, above the 2.0 threshold
Thesis & Journal · LIDFA.ISLocal privado en este navegador · Lider Faktoring A.S.
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

3.1x

↓

EV/EBITDA

N/A

•

ROE

33.7%

↑

Gross Margin

N/A

•

Debt/Equity

3.46

↑
52-Week Range$3
$2$4

TradingView lightweight chart

LIDFA.IS price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $2.990Periodo +3505.2%
Fair value: $2.990

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

+73.2%

FCF CAGR

—

FCF margin

-443.1%

FCF / Net income

-9.50x

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $2.08B · net income $969.4M · FCF $-9.21B

2022-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

—— pts

Operating margin

—— pts

Net margin

46.6%-5.0% pts

FCF margin

-443.1%-81.1% pts
MetricTTM
2025
2024
2023
2022
Income Statement
Revenue$2.08B$2.08B$1.48B$1.11B$400.3M
Net Income$969.4M$969.4M$656.7M$566.4M$206.9M
EPS0.890.890.600.520.22
Net Margin46.6%46.6%44.3%50.9%51.7%
Balance Sheet
Debt/Equity3.463.462.892.743.34
Current Ratio10.3010.30———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow$-9.21B$-9.21B$-4.83B$-2.70B$-1.45B
Returns
ROE33.7%33.7%34.4%51.0%40.8%
Valuation
P/E3.153.152.603.872.94
P/B1.131.130.901.971.39
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth40.3%40.3%33.1%178.0%—
EPS Growth47.6%47.6%15.9%137.3%—
Dividend Yield5.3%5.3%———

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

Margins (%)

Returns (%)

Leverage & Liquidity

Reverse DCF · market-implied EPS growthterminal P/E 15.0x · COE 10.0%

3Y implied EPS CAGR

-33.2%

fácil

EPS terminal req.

$0.27

Spread vs growth

80.8%

5Y implied EPS CAGR

-18.5%

fácil

EPS terminal req.

$0.32

Spread vs growth

66.1%

10Y implied EPS CAGR

-5.3%

fácil

EPS terminal req.

$0.52

Spread vs growth

52.9%

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 +69.0%

Total return

+69.0%

Start / end P/E

3.0x → 3.4x

EPS bridge

0.60 → 0.89

Residual

+5.2%

EPS growth+47.6%
Multiple rerating+10.9%
Dividend+5.3%
Residual / FX / buybacks / cross-term+5.2%

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.