StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
SHVA.TA$2533.00+3.39%
Fair $2533.00+0.0%

SHVA.TA

Automatic Bank Services Limited

Technology / Software - InfrastructureTel Aviv

$2533.00

+83.00 (+3.39%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $2533.00Fund rank 35/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 39/D
F-Score: 4/9

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 $15.4M · quality 68.7/100

Data gap 35/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 67/100Data 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

39/100

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: 0unknown: 4
No SEC-backed annual rows; valuation uses fallback financial data. Book/ROE model only applies to financial balance-sheet businesses.
Thesis & Journal · SHVA.TALocal privado en este navegador · Automatic Bank Services 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

$1.0B

P/E

24.4x

↑

EV/EBITDA

1368.8x

↑

ROE

18.4%

↑

Gross Margin

N/A

•

Debt/Equity

0.08

↓
52-Week Range$2533
$1900$2899

TradingView lightweight chart

SHVA.TA price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $2,450Periodo +264.9%
Fair value: $2,533

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

+10.2%

FCF CAGR

-27.9%

FCF margin

7.7%

FCF / Net income

0.27x

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $157.0M · net income $45.3M · FCF $12.2M

2022-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

—— pts

Operating margin

29.8%-9.3% pts

Net margin

28.8%+8.3% pts

FCF margin

7.7%-19.9% pts
MetricTTM
2025
2024
2023
2022
Income Statement
Revenue$157.0M$157.0M$151.5M$134.9M$117.3M
Net Income$45.3M$45.3M$50.9M$38.2M$24.1M
EBITDA$74.0M$74.0M$75.4M$58.1M$41.8M
EPS——1.270.960.60
Operating Margin29.8%29.8%36.7%31.1%39.1%
Net Margin28.8%28.8%33.6%28.3%20.5%
Balance Sheet
Debt/Equity0.080.080.080.090.10
Current Ratio5.775.77———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow$12.2M$12.2M$41.0M$15.4M$32.4M
Returns
ROE18.4%18.4%19.6%16.5%11.3%
Valuation
P/E24.3624.362003.151627.082421.67
EV/EBITDA1368.781368.781351.851069.601393.36
P/B412.30412.30393.44268.75274.54
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth3.6%3.6%12.3%15.0%—
EPS Growth——32.3%60.0%—
Dividend Yield6.1%6.1%———

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 +2.3%

Total return

+2.3%

Start / end P/E

n/dx → n/dx

EPS bridge

1.27 → n/d

Residual

-3.8%

EPS growthn/d
Multiple reratingn/d
Dividend+6.1%
Residual / FX / buybacks / cross-term-3.8%

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.