StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
MAPS.MI$2.52-0.40%
Fair $2.52+0.0%

MAPS.MI

Maps S.p.A.

Technology / Software - ApplicationMilan

$2.52

-0.01 (-0.40%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $2.52Fund rank 20/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 26/D
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 14%

FCF escenarios

weak_data · normalized FCF $1.1M · quality 27.7/100

Data gap 20/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 6/100Data 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

26/100

D

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. Insufficient audited annual history (<3 SEC-backed years); composite fair value and forward targets are disabled until manually verified. ROE is 2.2%, below the 5% threshold
Thesis & Journal · MAPS.MILocal privado en este navegador · Maps S.p.A.
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

$33M

P/E

63.0x

↑

EV/EBITDA

5.4x

↓

ROE

2.2%

↓

Gross Margin

45.9%

↑

Debt/Equity

N/A

•
52-Week Range$3
$2$4

TradingView lightweight chart

MAPS.MI price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $2.520Periodo -11.6%
Fair value: $2.520

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

+4.6%

FCF CAGR

—

FCF margin

-7.7%

FCF / Net income

-4.07x

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $30.3M · net income $571085.0 · FCF $-2.3M

2022-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

45.9%-2.2% pts

Operating margin

5.8%-5.0% pts

Net margin

1.9%-8.3% pts

FCF margin

-7.7%+27.4% pts
MetricTTM
2025
2024
2023
2022
Income Statement
Revenue$30.3M$30.3M$26.6M$28.6M$26.5M
Net Income$571085.00$571085.00$1.9M$924580.00$2.7M
EBITDA$5.5M$5.5M$7.1M$5.1M$5.7M
EPS———0.080.23
Gross Margin45.9%45.9%55.5%43.2%48.1%
Operating Margin5.8%5.8%12.8%4.8%10.9%
Net Margin1.9%1.9%7.1%3.2%10.2%
Balance Sheet
Current Ratio1.721.72———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow$-2.3M$-2.3M$3.7M$1.1M$-9.3M
Returns
ROE2.2%2.2%7.4%4.1%12.8%
Valuation
P/E63.0063.00—41.0815.33
EV/EBITDA5.365.364.756.475.98
P/B1.261.261.561.701.97
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth13.8%13.8%-6.9%8.0%—
EPS Growth———-67.2%—

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 -27.8%

Total return

-27.8%

Start / end P/E

n/dx → n/dx

EPS bridge

n/d → n/d

Residual

-27.8%

EPS growthn/d
Multiple reratingn/d
Dividend+0.0%
Residual / FX / buybacks / cross-term-27.8%

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.