StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
Q01.SI$0.99+0.00%
Fair $0.99+0.0%

Q01.SI

QAF Limited

Consumer Defensive / Packaged FoodsSES

$0.99

+0.00 (+0.00%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $0.99Fund rank 37/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 48/C
F-Score: 5/9

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 24% · confianza 25%

FCF escenarios

weak_data · normalized FCF $35.4M · quality 78.0/100

Data gap 37/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 73/100Data 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

48/100

C

Piotroski

5/9

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 · Q01.SILocal privado en este navegador · QAF Limited
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

$570M

P/E

14.1x

↓

EV/EBITDA

4.9x

↓

ROE

7.8%

↑

Gross Margin

47.1%

↑

Debt/Equity

0.05

↓
52-Week Range$1
$1$1

TradingView lightweight chart

Q01.SI price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $0.990Periodo +4.8%
Fair value: $0.990

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

+3.1%

FCF CAGR

+11.0%

FCF margin

5.6%

FCF / Net income

0.89x

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $633.6M · net income $39.8M · FCF $35.4M

2022-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

47.1%+1.6% pts

Operating margin

5.3%+2.4% pts

Net margin

6.3%+2.9% pts

FCF margin

5.6%+1.1% pts
MetricTTM
2025
2024
2023
2022
Income Statement
Revenue$633.6M$633.6M$636.1M$628.6M$577.5M
Net Income$39.8M$39.8M$34.7M$27.5M$19.4M
EBITDA$76.7M$76.7M$73.3M$67.9M$67.4M
EPS——0.060.050.03
Gross Margin47.1%47.1%47.5%46.4%45.5%
Operating Margin5.3%5.3%5.6%6.0%2.9%
Net Margin6.3%6.3%5.5%4.4%3.4%
Balance Sheet
Debt/Equity0.050.050.060.100.08
Current Ratio3.093.09———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow$35.4M$35.4M$45.9M$17.9M$25.9M
Returns
ROE7.8%7.8%6.9%5.6%3.9%
Valuation
P/E14.1414.1413.8417.1624.71
EV/EBITDA4.944.944.134.494.57
P/B1.121.120.960.970.97
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth-0.4%-0.4%1.2%8.8%—
EPS Growth——26.3%40.5%—
Dividend Yield5.1%5.1%———

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 +21.5%

Total return

+21.5%

Start / end P/E

n/dx → n/dx

EPS bridge

0.06 → n/d

Residual

+16.5%

EPS growthn/d
Multiple reratingn/d
Dividend+5.0%
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.